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 09/05/2025. Claims 1-20 are pending in the application. Claims 1-20 have been rejected as set forth below.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “a threshold of a preferred foot” in line 10, needs to be changed to “the threshold of the preferred foot position”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “wherein the detecting at least one foot position” in line 2, needs to be changed to “wherein detecting the at least one foot position”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “a threshold of a preferred foot” in line 12, needs to be changed to “the threshold of the preferred foot position”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “wherein the detecting at least one foot position” in lines 2-3, needs to be changed to “wherein detecting the at least one foot position”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “a threshold of a preferred foot” in line 13, needs to be changed to “the threshold of the preferred foot position”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “wherein the detecting at least one foot position” in lines 2-3, needs to be changed to “wherein detecting the at least one foot position”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rubin et al. (US 2022/0001240 A1) in view of Shinomiya et al. (US. 2010/0262048 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 9 and 15, Rubin teaches a method of operating/a non-transitory computer-readable medium, the computer-readable storage medium including instructions that when executed by a computer (¶ [175]-[178]), cause the computer to operate an exercise device system (Fig. 11) including/comprising: at least one platform (i.e. 100, ¶ [58]) on which a user can stand (abstract, Fig. 2), and an electromagnetic force generator for generating an exercise force (i.e. motor 302, ¶ [59]), the at least one platform including force sensors (i.e. 126A-D, 128A-D, abstract, ¶ [60], [64], [68], [83], [86]), the method comprising:
detecting at least one foot position/force distribution on the at least one platform using the force sensors of the at least one platform when the user is standing on the at least one platform with the at least one platform bearing the user's weight and determining whether an exercise form is proper or the exercise is being performed properly based on the at least one foot position/force distribution detected being outside of a threshold of a preferred foot position/force for a correct exercise form or execution while the user is standing on the at least one platform (Fig. 2, abstract, ¶ [53]-[54], [60], [64]-[65], [71]-[72], [86], [91], [93], the at least one platform includes one or more sensors for measuring a force applied to the top of the platform during performance of an exercise, such that as a user performs an exercise while at least partially supported by the exercise platform, the load cells measure the resulting force. In addition to providing feedback to control the dynamic force module, the exercise platform may also be used for other purposes including: monitoring changes to the center of pressure during an exercise to monitor and/or provide feedback on a user’s form and observing a user’s foot positioning during exercises); and controlling the electromagnetic force generator based on the at least one foot position/force distribution (¶ [53], [72], [89], [91], [97], [100], [110], [116], [123], claim 1, in certain implementations, the reactive force provided by the dynamic force module may vary depending on the position, speed, or acceleration applied by the user as measured by various sensors. The position, speed, and/or acceleration of the user may be determined using various sensors incorporated into the exercise platform or the dynamic force module itself. For example, in certain implementations, the exercise platform and/or dynamic force module may include one or more of potentiometers, accelerometers, encoders, switches, load cells, strain gauges, pressure pads, and other sensors for determining the position, orientation, speed, acceleration, loading, or other parameters of various components of the exercise platform and, as a result, the user. In certain implementations, pressure sensor, capacitive pads, mechanical switches, or similar components may be integrated into a surface of the exercise platform 1101. If the user subsequently steps off the platform, the exercise platform 1101 may automatically return to a safe state or otherwise modify the reactive for provided by the dynamic force module 1128. The motor system 1130 may also include a brake system for slowing, stopping, and/or locking the motor 1131 during operation. ).
Although Rubin can determine a user stepping on/off the at least one platform, user’s imbalance, favoring one foot over the other and having the correct exercise form or executing the exercises properly based on comparison of the output of the one or more sensors with a predetermined threshold, and control the motor based on the force sensor’s output (see above for details), Rubin does not specifically teach based on the at least one foot position being outside of a threshold of a preferred foot position while the user is standing on the at least one platform, disabling the electromagnetic force generator to prevent the user from performing an exercise; and based on the at least one foot position being within a threshold of a preferred foot position while the user is standing on the at least one platform, activating the electromagnetic force generator to enable the user to perform an exercise.
Regarding claims 1, 9 and 15, Shinomiya teaches a method of operating an exercise device including/a computer (18/180), caused to operate an exercise device/an exercise device system comprising: at least one platform (i.e. 200 with 21/22, Figs. 8 and 16) on which a user can stand (¶ [91]), and an electromagnetic force generator (i.e. 3/31 (motor), Figs. 8 and 13) for generating an exercise force (¶ [91], [107]), the at least one platform including force sensors (210/211 and 220/221), the method comprising: detecting at least one foot position on the at least one platform using the force sensors of the at least one platform when the user is standing on the at least one platform with the at least one platform bearing the user's weight (abstract, ¶ [91], [98], [116], [120], [125]-[133], [135]-[142], [144]-[145], [148], [151]-[152], the 2nd embodiment is configured to induce muscle activity of the exerciser and is designed for use by the exerciser in the standing posture); based on the at least one foot position being outside of a threshold of a preferred foot position while the user is standing on the at least one platform, disabling the electromagnetic force generator to prevent the user from performing an exercise (abstract, ¶ [125]-[142], [144], [148], the judgement unit 183 is configured to judge whether or not the exerciser is in a predetermined exercise position on the basis of the partial loads detected by each of the left foot load sensors 210 and 211 and each of the right foot load sensors 220 and 221, and determining the projected weight center of the exerciser. The control unit 180 stops the motor 31, to stop the left-footrest and the right-footrest when the judgement unit judges the exerciser is not in the exercise position. The control unit 180 does not activate the motor 31 for the exerciser’s safety while the judgement unit judges the exerciser is not in the exercise position. Hence the user is prevented from exercising. Also, if at the time the power switch of the exercise machine is turned on, the user’s feet are not in the predetermined exercise position (i.e., on the left footrest and the right footrest, respectively, the control unit does not activate the motor. As such, in order to activate the exercise machine, the exerciser is required to stand in the predetermined exercise position. Furthermore, if the exerciser loses balance and leaves from the predetermined exercise position, the load detected by the load sensors can become less than a predetermined threshold, therefore, the judgement unit judges that the exerciser is out of the predetermined exercise position, this causes the control unit to stop the motor); and based on the at least one foot position being moved to within a threshold of a preferred foot position while the user is standing on the platform, activating the electromagnetic force generator to enable the user to perform an exercise (abstract, ¶ [131]-[144], [148], The control unit 180 activates the motor 31 to restart the exercise when the exercisers returns to the predetermined exercise position, thereby enabling the user to exercise. Upon modification of Rubin’s invention with features of Shinomiya, the electromagnetic force generator would be disables, based on the at least one foot position being outside of a threshold of a preferred foot position while the user is standing on the at least one platform, to prevent the user from performing an exercise and the electromagnetic force generator would be activated based on the at least one foot position being moved within the threshold of the preferred foot position while standing on the platform).
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 Rubin’s invention such that based on the at least one foot position being outside of a threshold of a preferred foot position, disabling the electromagnetic force generator to prevent the user from performing an exercise; and based on the at least one foot position being within a threshold of a preferred foot position, activating the electromagnetic force generator to enable the user to perform an exercise, as taught by Shinomiya in order to enable use of the device for various exercise and rehabilitation purposes and by various users with different health and fitness conditions including elderly users, and to further prevent the users from potential harm/injuries by performing exercises incorrectly (with incorrect posture/form), thereby providing for a safer device to use.
Regarding claims 2, 10 and 16, Rubin in view of Shinomiya teaches wherein the threshold of the preferred foot position is in a front-back direction of the at least one platform from a central exercise position on the at least one platform (Rubin: ¶ [60], [65]; Shinomiya: ¶ [99], [120], [122]).
Regarding claims 3, 11 and 17, Rubin in view of Shinomiya teaches wherein the exercise device further includes one or more lights (Rubin: i.e. 148A, 148B, ¶ [79]-[80], [143]), comprising: based on the at least one foot position being outside of a threshold of an ideal foot position (Shinomiya: ¶ [135]-[145], [148], [151]-[152], [154]), prompting movement of a user's foot towards an ideal foot position using the one or more lights (Rubin: i.e. 148A, 148B, ¶ [79]-[80], [143]; upon modification of Rubin’s invention with features of Shinomiya, the one or more lights would prompt movement of a user’s foot towards an ideal foot position).
Regarding claims 4, 12 and 18, Rubin in view of Shinomiya teaches wherein activating the electromagnetic force generator comprises generating an exercise force corresponding to an exercise force specified in an exercise routine (Rubin: ¶ [102]-[103]).
Regarding claims 5, 13 and 19, Rubin in view of Shinomiya teaches wherein the at least one foot position comprises a left foot position and a right foot position (Shinomiya: Figs. 8 and 13), and wherein the detecting at least one foot position comprises detecting the left foot position and detecting the right foot position (Shinomiya: ¶ [98]), the method further comprising: based on the left foot position and the right foot position being within a threshold of alignment with each other from a central left/right position (Shinomiya: i.e. range A, Fig. 16), activating the electromagnetic force generator (Shinomiya: ¶ [135]-[145], [148], [151]-[152], [154]); and based on the left foot position and the right foot position being outside the threshold of alignment with each other from the central left/right position, disabling the electromagnetic force generator (Shinomiya: ¶ [135]-[145], [148], [151]-[152], [154]).
Regarding claims 6-7, Rubin in view of Shinomiya teaches wherein the threshold of alignment is in a front-back direction of the at least one platform (Shinomiya: ¶ [151], prescribed range A (Fig. 16) is a rectangle encompassing a front-back direction of the platform), wherein the threshold of alignment is in a side-to-side direction of the platform (Shinomiya: ¶ [151], prescribed range A (Fig. 16) is a rectangle encompassing a side-to-side direction of the platform).
Regarding claims 8, 14 and 20, Rubin in view of Shinomiya teaches wherein the exercise device further includes one or more lights (Rubin: i.e. 148A, 148B, ¶ [79]-[80], [143]), comprising: based on the left foot position and the right foot position being outside the threshold of alignment with each other, prompting movement of one of a user's feet towards the other one of the user's feet using the one or more lights (Shinomiya: i.e. outside of range A, ¶ [135]-[145], [148], [151]-[152], [154], Shinomiya teaches determining that the left foot position and the right foot position is outside the threshold of alignment/range A; Rubin: ¶ [79]-[80], [143], Rubin teaches using lights to provide feedback/guidance for the user regarding his/her exercise form or execution and/or various other parameters. Upon modification of Rubin’s invention with features of Shinomiya, the one or more lights would prompt movement of one of a user’s feet towards the other one of the user’s feet based on detected feet position being outside the threshold in order to encourage the user exercise with the right form and correctly, thereby preventing the user from further injuries).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 09/05/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s arguments regarding claims 1, 9 and 15, stating: that neither Rubin nor Shinomiya alone or in combination, disclose “detecting at least one foot position ... when the user is standing on the at least one platform with the at least one platform bearing the user’s weight; based on the at least one foot position being outside of a threshold of a preferred foot position while the user is standing on the at least one platform, disabling the electromagnetic force generator to prevent the user from per forming an exercise; and based on the at least one foot position being moved to within a threshold of a preferred foot position while the user is standing on the platform, activating the electromagnetic force generator to enable the user to perform an exercise”, that the outputs of the sensors in Rubin are primarily used to provide control inputs for varying the exercise force, to determine if the user is on the platform to switch the device on, to determine if the user leaves the platform to switch the device off, to monitor the user’s form during exercise, weighing the user and counting repetitions, that Rubin does not disclose, when the user is standing on the exercise device, determining an incorrect foot position, and then enabling the device when the foot is moved into a correct foot position, thereby to enable the user to perform an exercise, that Shinomiya’s device is activated when the user is standing with one foot on the left foot rest and one foot on the right foot rest, if the user is out of balance during exercise based on the position of a determined center of pressure located between the feet, or if monitoring determined that the exercise is “abnormal”, then the exercise is stopped, thereby both Rubin and Shinomiya are concerned with determining whether or not the user is on the device before activating it, and then monitoring the user’s form or performance during the exercise, neither disclose or suggests, when the user is standing on the exercise device determining an incorrect foot position, and then enabling the device when the foot is moved into a correct foot position to enable the user to perform an exercise, the Examiner respectfully disagrees and would like to mention the followings.
Claims 1, 9 and 15, have been rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Rubin in view of Shinomiya. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Rubin in Fig. 2 shows the user standing on at least one platform with the at least one platform bearing the user’s weight. Rubin also teaches that in addition to providing feedback to control the dynamic force module, the exercise platform may also be used for other purposes including: monitoring changes to the center of pressure during an exercise to monitor and/or provide feedback on a user’s form and observing a user’s foot positioning during exercises (see ¶ [54] of Rubin). Rubin further states that in certain implementations, the reactive force provided by the dynamic force module may depend on the position of the user (see above for details). Rubin also teaches detecting user’s at least one foot force distribution on the at least one platform using the force sensors when the user is standing on the at least one platform and determining whether an exercise form is proper or the exercise is being performed properly based on the detected force distribution being outside of a threshold of force for a correct exercise form or execution, while standing (see cited paragraphs for details). Please note that foot position on the at least one platform for each exercise contributes to the force distribution detected for such exercise. As further stated above, Rubin does not specifically teach based on the at least one foot the at least one foot position being outside of a threshold of a preferred foot position while the user is standing on the at least one platform, disabling the electromagnetic force generator to prevent the user from performing an exercise; and based on the at least one foot position being within a threshold of a preferred foot position while the user is standing on the at least one platform, activating the electromagnetic force generator to enable the user to perform an exercise.
Shinomiya teaches an exercise device comprising at least one platform (200 with 21/22, see Figs. 8 and 16), that the exercise device in the second embodiment is configured to induce muscle activity of the exerciser and is designed for use by the exerciser in the standing posture (¶ [91]). Shinomiya further, in at least ¶ [142], [144], [148] as well as other cited paragraphs above, teaches, the judgement unit 183 is configured to judge whether or not the exerciser is in a predetermined exercise position on the basis of the partial loads detected by each of the left foot load sensors 210 and 211 and each of the right foot load sensors 220 and 221, and determining the projected weight center of the exerciser. The control unit 180 stops the motor 31, to stop the left-footrest and the right-footrest when the judgement unit judges the exerciser is not in the exercise position. The control unit 180 does not activate the motor 31 for the exerciser’s safety while the judgement unit judges the exerciser is not in the exercise position. Hence the user is prevented from exercising. Also, if at the time the power switch of the exercise machine is turned on, the user’s feet are not in the predetermined exercise position (i.e., on the left footrest and the right footrest, respectively), the control unit does not activate the motor. As such, in order to activate the exercise machine, the exerciser is required to stand in the predetermined exercise position. Note that one or both of user’s feet can still be on the at least one platform (200), but not on the left/right footrest(s), thereby not in the predetermined exercise position. In such case, even if the exercise machine/device is turned on, the motor will not be activated. This can be the case at the initial startup of the exercise device or at any time during the exercise. Furthermore, if the exerciser loses balance and leaves from the predetermined exercise position, the load detected by the load sensors can become less than a predetermined threshold, therefore, the judgement unit judges that the exerciser is out of the predetermined exercise position, this causes the control unit to stop the motor. For instance, the exerciser moves own left foot from the left-footrest 21. In this instance, the load detected by the left foot load sensors 210 and 211 provided on the left-footrest 21 becomes less than a predetermined threshold, therefore, the judgement unit 183 judges that the exerciser is out of the predetermined exercise position. This causes the control unit 180 to stop the motor. The control unit 180 activates the motor 31 to restart the exercise when the exercisers returns to the predetermined exercise position. As a result, upon stopping the motor/disabling the electromagnetic force generator, the user is prevented from exercising and upon activating the motor/electromagnetic force generator, the user is enabled to exercise. As stated above, upon modification of Rubin’s invention with features of Shinomiya, the electromagnetic force generator would be disables, based on the at least one foot position being outside of a threshold of a preferred foot position while the user is standing on the at least one platform, to prevent the user from performing an exercise and the electromagnetic force generator would be activated based on the at least one foot position being moved within the threshold of the preferred foot position while standing on the platform). 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 Rubin’s invention such that based on the at least one foot position being outside of a threshold of a preferred foot position, disabling the electromagnetic force generator to prevent the user from performing an exercise; and based on the at least one foot position being within a threshold of a preferred foot position, activating the electromagnetic force generator to enable the user to perform an exercise, as taught by Shinomiya in order to enable use of the device for various exercise and rehabilitation purposes and by various users with different health and fitness conditions including elderly users, and to further prevent the users from potential harm/injuries by performing exercises incorrectly (with incorrect posture/form), thereby providing for a safer device to use.
With respect to applicant’s assertion that balance relates to the position of the user’s center of gravity above and between the feet, not foot position per se, that a user can have the correct foot positioning and be unbalanced, or have the incorrect foot positioning and be in balance, the Examiner would like to mention that the balance of the user and the position of the user’s center of gravity can also be related to the positioning of the user’s feet. In other words, the user’s foot/feet position can contribute to the balance of the user, whereby the user can be unbalanced due to incorrect foot positioning.
In response to applicant’s assertion that both Rubin and Shinomiya are concerned with determining whether or not the user is on the device before activating it, and then monitoring the user’s form or performance during the exercise, neither disclose or suggests, when the user is standing on the exercise device determining an incorrect foot position, and then enabling the device when the foot is moved into a correct foot position to enable the user to perform an exercise, the Examiner would like to mention that nowhere in the claims, has applicant recited any limitations regarding the timing and the order of disabling and activating the electromagnetic force generator with respect to the exercise. The limitation reciting “based on the at least one foot position being moved to within a threshold of a preferred foot position, while the user is standing on the platform, activating the electromagnetic force generator to enable the user to perform an exercise”, does not require the at least one foot position being moved from the position outside of the threshold of the preferred foot position, to a position within the threshold of the preferred foot position. As such, applicant is arguing narrower than claimed. As explained above, Rubin in view of Shinomiya teaches the limitations of the claims as currently presented.
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 SHILA JALALZADEH ABYANEH whose telephone number is (571)270-7403. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:30 am - 3:00 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, LoAn Jimenez can be reached at (571)272- 4966. 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.
/SHILA JALALZADEH ABYANEH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784