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 .
Status
Claims 1-20 have been examined. Claims 1, 5,13, 16, 18, 20 have been amended.
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 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.
Claim 1- 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Riley et al (US 20120179278A1 hereinafter Riley ) in view of King et al. (US20180036591A1 hereinafter King) and further in view of Ackland (US20160263439A1).
With respect to Claim 1, Riley teaches a method comprising:
displaying, by a user device, a user interface for receiving user inputs to generate a workout schedule (‘278; Para 0081: Riley describes the screen 800 of electronic device 508 displays the general features of a selected workout (e.g., the individual workout activities) for that workout session in panel 900. At some time toward the beginning of the workout (e.g., either before actually starting, during, or after an initial warm-up period, etc.), the user is prompted to enter information indicating how he or she “feels” that day. More specifically, in this illustrated example, as the warm-up period begins or progresses (as indicated by the darkened time slot in the workout schedule shown in display panel 900), the system and method of this example ask the user to input information regarding the desired workout level for that day);
receiving, by the user device and via the user interface, the user inputs indicating one or more workout session preferences specifying at least one or more days of a week of the workout schedule and one or more workout content preferences (‘278; Para 0096: the default settings, if any, may be determined based on any desired information, including, for example, historical data relating to a user's recorded workout history in general, a user's workout history for that particular activity type, or other features of a user's preferences or history (such as typical overall workout elapsed time, elapsed distance, typical speed, typical incline or resistance settings, weight, age, weight loss/gain, etc.; Para 0137: Riley further discloses workouts may include a variety of different activity types, and optionally activities that change from workout-to-workout (e.g., different types of activities on different days, different workout parameters on different days, etc.).);
generating a schedule framework based on the one or more workout session preferences, the schedule framework comprising one or more scheduled workout sessions on one or more days of the week, (‘278; Figs 9, Fig. 12, Fig. 13 illustrates workout sessions on one day or more days of a week),
King teaches
wherein generating the schedule framework comprises:
generating, by the user device, one or more sets of workout sessions for each respective day of the schedule framework, each workout session of the one or more sets of workout sessions indicating a workout assigned for the workout session and selected based in part on a score representing the one or more workout session preferences satisfying a set of predetermined schedule framework criteria specifying at least one of a modality, intensity or variety of the workout sessions, where the score is reduced for each criterion in the set of predetermined schedule framework criteria that is not satisfied (‘591; Abstract; Paras 0032, Para 0034: workouts may be organized in plans, for example plans selected according to the user's goals with techniques described below. In some embodiments, plans may be arranged according to template plans in which each template plan includes a plurality of workout-selection criteria at each stage of the plan. In some cases, the criteria may specify parameters by which a plurality of candidate workouts are selected, such as workout templates described herein, at each stage, and some embodiments may select among those candidates based on various criteria, such as the user's overall goal, a user's expressed preference for a particular area of focus, or feedback from the user, for example indicating that an injury has occurred or that goals have changed. Examples of a workout focus include full body toning, tone down, endurance, strength, core, and recovery. In some cases, each stage of a plan may have a plurality of workout templates corresponding to each of these different focuses, and some embodiments may select among these different focuses to select among the candidates based on a variety of criteria, including how frequently other focuses were selected or a user expressed preference); and
transforming, by the user device, the schedule framework into a data structure representing the workout schedule by selecting, for each respective scheduled workout session in the schedule framework, a workout content item from a set of workout content items based at least in part on the one or more workout content preferences and the one or more scheduled workout sessions in the schedule framework; (‘591; Para 0076: a workout may specify a sequence of exercises and associated videos, some of which involve various pieces of equipment at a workout facility. For example, the user computing device may send a request for a workout indicating an identifier of the facility, some embodiments, may access a template workout for the user, for example, one constructed with the techniques described below based on the user's profile; Para 0197; Para 0034); and
displaying by the user device and based at least in part on the user inputs, at least a portion of the data structure representing the workout schedule (‘591; Para 0077: select workouts consistent with both a workout template and equipment available at the workout facility. In some cases, the templates may specify a sequence of criteria by which each video block is selected (e.g., body region, intensity level, muscle group, injury constraints, or the like). In some cases, the templates may also specify subsets of the sequence amenable to being re-sequenced (e.g., a first portion may identify three sets of criteria that may each be applied in any order to select three respective workout videos, followed by a second portion that identifies five such sets of criteria, and then a third portion with two sets of criteria for a total of ten workout videos). In some cases, each video that satisfies the criteria at a given stage may be referred to as a candidate video, and those candidate videos may each be associated with workout equipment).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify the system of Riley with the technique of Event-based prescription of fitness-related activities as taught by King and the motivation is to provide the framework of scheduled workout activities.
Ackland teaches
where the score is reduced for each criterion in the set of predetermined schedule framework criteria that is not satisfied (‘439; Para 0392: The method involves applying raw or derived data to a series of thresholds that are linked to coaching advice. A score is also generated..; Para 0398: A drop in Endurance levels indicates cardiovascular fatigue which will require a reduction of the total workout volumes and in more severe cases, a reduction in all Activity Type volumes as well. Speed deterioration may mean reducing speed Activity Type volumes. Higher values in all 3 performance parameters means improvement either through recovery or physiological improvement. Several performance parameters may change simultaneously leading to multiple adjustments of the above)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify the system of Riley/King with the technique of monitoring an activity session as taught by Ackland and the motivation is to provide the score of intensity reduction in the framework of scheduled workout activities
Claims 13 and 18 are rejected as the same reason with claim 1.
With respect to Claim 2, the combined art teaches the method of claim 1, wherein generating the schedule framework comprises, for each respective day of the one or more days of the schedule framework: generating one or more sets of workout sessions for a respective day of the schedule framework; generating, for each respective set of workout sessions, one or more candidate schedule frameworks; scoring each respective candidate schedule frameworks of the one or more candidate schedule frameworks based on a set of predetermined schedule framework criteria; and selecting, for the respective day of the schedule framework, a respective set of workout sessions associated with a respective candidate schedule framework having a highest score among the one or more candidate schedule frameworks (‘591; Para 0079).
Claims 14 and 19 are rejected as the same reason with claim 2.
With respect to Claim 3, the combined art teaches the method of claim 2, wherein the predetermined schedule framework criteria comprise equipment availability (‘591; Para 0079).
With respect to Claim 4, the combined art teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising, before selecting the workout content item: filtering the set of workout content items based on the one or more scheduled workout sessions in the schedule framework (‘591; Para 0079: Filter criteria may return responses that satisfy the criteria, without necessarily indicating an amount of responsiveness. Search criteria may return results that indicate a strength of correspondence between the criteria and the result. For example, a criteria set may specify five different criterions for selecting a subsequent video block (e.g., male trainer, upper body area, high intensity, knee-injury compatible, no bench press equipment),).
Claim 15 is rejected as the same reason with claim 4.
With respect to Claim 5, the combined art teaches the method of claim 1, Ackland discloses wherein generating the schedule framework further comprises generating the score by applying a set of predetermined rules corresponding to the predetermined schedule framework criteria, each rule specifying a value added to the score when its corresponding criterion is satisfied and a reduction applied to the score when its corresponding criterion is not satisfied, and wherein the user device selects the one or more sets of workout sessions that maximize the score across candidate schedule frameworks generated by the user device (‘439; Para 0146: at least one memory component having a classification system, interpretative algorithms and rules for workout and long term Activity Plan adjustment, one or more workout plans and long term Activity Plans ) ;
King discloses
wherein selecting the workout content item comprises, for each respective scheduled workout session in the schedule framework: scoring, for each respective workout content item in the set of workout content items, a respective workout content item based on a set of predetermined content criteria; and selecting, for a respective scheduled workout session, a workout content item having a highest score from among the scored set of workout content items (‘591; Para 0105: the user profile attributes may include information received from sensors 104. In some embodiments, the video blocks may be ranked based on their attributes score and based on the user profile attributes. For example, a highest scoring video block may be selected to be presented to the user. FIGS. 6-7 illustrate examples 600 and 700 of video selection based on scored attributes).
Claims 16 and 20 are rejected as the same reason with claim 5.
With respect to Claim 6, the combined art teaches the method of claim 5, wherein the predetermined content criteria comprise relevance, recency, popularity, and the workout content preferences (‘591; Para 0032: the user preference; Para 0158: relevant for a workout video).
With respect to Claim 7, the combined art teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the workout session preferences comprise active days, modalities, and duration (‘278; Para 0145).
With respect to Claim 8, the combined art teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the workout content preferences comprise genre, instructor, popularity, and recency (‘591; Para 0059).
With respect to Claim 9, the combined art teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the request further also includes a number of weeks, and the schedule framework spans one week (‘591; Paras 0074, 0125).
With respect to Claim 10, the combined art teaches the method of claim 9, further comprising: repeating the receiving, generating, selecting, and providing for the number of weeks such that each week corresponds to a respective schedule framework (‘591; Paras 0202, 0204).
With respect to Claim 11, the combined art teaches the method of claim 1, wherein selecting the workout content item for a respective scheduled workout session corresponds to at least one other selected workout content item (‘591; Para 0077).
Claim 17 is rejected as the same reason with claim 11.
With respect to Claim 12, the combined art teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: rearranging, for each respective day in the schedule framework, one or more scheduled workout sessions associated with the respective day such that the one or more scheduled workout sessions are in a predetermined order (‘591; Para 0077).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/01/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In the Remark filed 12/01/2025, the Applicant argued that Ackland does not disclose any “predetermined schedule framework criteria” nor any mechanism where “the score is reduced for each criterion in the set of predetermined schedule framework criteria that is not satisfied”.
In response to the Applicant’s argument, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. In fact, Ackland discloses coaching advice based on Activity Plan and workout compliance may include commentary around the aspects of a workout schedule, future workouts, Activity Types and repetitions left to complete in a workout, and level of compliance to a workout or Activity Plan (‘439; Para 0140). Ackland further discloses the coaching system defining a modification based on at least one satisfied threshold criteria from at least one monitored parameter (‘439; Para 0102). King further discloses select workouts consistent with both a workout template and equipment available at the workout facility. In some cases, the templates may specify a sequence of criteria by which each video block is selected (e.g., body region, intensity level, muscle group, injury constraints, or the like). In some cases, the templates may also specify subsets of the sequence amenable to being re-sequenced (e.g., a first portion may identify three sets of criteria that may each be applied in any order to select three respective workout videos, followed by a second portion that identifies five such sets of criteria, and then a third portion with two sets of criteria for a total of ten workout videos). In some cases, each video that satisfies the criteria at a given stage may be referred to as a candidate video, and those candidate videos may each be associated with workout equipment (591; Para 0077)
Given broadest reasonable interpretation of the recited claims, it is submitted that the feature of the workout schedule of Ackland, the templates specifying a sequence of criteria of King are in the form of predetermined schedule framework criteria as described in the invention.
Therefore, the Examiner maintains rejection of all recited claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
WO2023288026A1, 2023-01-19, Bristol et al., Systems and Methods for Exercise.
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 HIEP VAN NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5211. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday between 8:00AM and 5:00PM 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, Jason B Dunham can be reached at 5712728109. 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.
/HIEP V NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3686