DETAILED ACTION
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 § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 8-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by SAIKI (US 20150238813 A1).
With respect to Claim(s) 1, 14, SAIKI teaches motion analysis device includes a processing unit that performs motion analysis of a subject using an output of a sensor unit and the BRI of:
a first sensor arrangement for measuring angular rate of the controller for at least one axis to provide a first measurement data (See, e.g., ¶ 0142; See also, e.g., Fig(s). 4);
a second sensor arrangement for measuring angular rate of the controller for said at least one axis to provide a second measurement data (See, e.g., ¶ 0142; See also, e.g., Fig(s). 4);
a processing circuitry for generating a control signal representing angular rate of the controller for said at least one axis based on the first measurement data and the second measurement data (See, e.g., ¶ 0142; See also, e.g., Fig(s). 4);
and
communication interface for coupling with the external computer system and for providing the control signal to the external computer system to control the application (See, e.g., ¶ 0142; See also, e.g., Fig(s). 4).
With respect to Claim(s) 8, SAIKI teaches the BRI of the parent claim(s).
SAIKI further teaches the BRI of:
wherein
the processing circuitry is configured to:
based on the first measurement data, obtain at least one first sample associated with a time occasion (See, e.g., Fig(s). 5-7, 9A-10, 14, 15);
based on the second measurement data, obtain at least one second sample associated with said time occasion (See, e.g., Fig(s). 5-7, 9A-10, 14, 15);
determine a value for the time occasion based on the at least one first sample and at least one second sample (See, e.g., Fig(s). 5-7, 9A-10, 14, 15); and
utilize the determined value for said time occasion in generating the control signal (See, e.g., Fig(s). 5-7, 9A-10, 14, 15).
With respect to Claim(s) 9, SAIKI teaches the BRI of the parent claim(s).
SAIKI further teaches the BRI of:
wherein
the processing circuitry is configured to:
determine, based on the first measurement data and second measurement data, a plurality of values for different time occasions (See, e.g., Fig(s). 5-7, 9A-10, 14, 15); and
utilize the plurality of values in generating the control signal (See, e.g., Fig(s). 5-7, 9A-10, 14, 15).
With respect to Claim(s) 10, SAIKI teaches the BRI of the parent claim(s).
SAIKI further teaches the BRI of:
wherein
the processing circuitry is configured to:
obtain, based on the first measurement data, a first parameter representing angular rate of the controller for said at least one axis (See, e.g., Fig(s). 5-7, 9A-10, 14, 15);
obtain, based on the second measurement data, a second parameter representing angular rate of the controller for said at least one axis (See, e.g., Fig(s). 5-7, 9A-10, 14, 15); and
generate the control signal based on first and second parameters (See, e.g., Fig(s). 5-7, 9A-10, 14, 15).
With respect to Claim(s) 11, SAIKI teaches the BRI of the parent claim(s).
SAIKI further teaches the BRI of:
wherein
the first sensor arrangement comprises at least one of
an angular rate sensor or a gyroscope (See, e.g., ¶ 0142; See also, e.g., Fig(s). 4), and
the second sensor arrangement comprises at least one of
an angular rate sensor or a gyroscope (See, e.g., ¶ 0142; See also, e.g., Fig(s). 4).
With respect to Claim(s) 12, SAIKI teaches the BRI of the parent claim(s).
SAIKI further teaches the BRI of:
wherein
said at least one axis comprises
a plurality of axes (See, e.g., ¶ 0142; See also, e.g., Fig(s). 4).
With respect to Claim(s) 13, SAIKI teaches the BRI of the parent claim(s).
SAIKI further teaches the BRI of:
wherein
each sensor arrangement comprises
at least one sensor for each of the plurality of axes (See, e.g., ¶ 0142; See also, e.g., Fig(s). 4).
With respect to Claim(s) 15, SAIKI teaches the BRI of the parent claim(s).
SAIKI further teaches the BRI of:
the controller as claimed in claim 1;
and
a computer system external to the controller (See, e.g., ¶ 0142; See also, e.g., Fig(s). 4),
wherein
the computer system comprises
at least one processor (See, e.g., ¶ 0142; See also, e.g., Fig(s). 4)
and
at least one memory including computer program code which when executed by the at least one processor (See, e.g., ¶ 0142; See also, e.g., Fig(s). 4)
causes the computer system at least to:
execute an application (See, e.g., ¶ 0142; See also, e.g., Fig(s). 4);
receive a control signal from the controller (See, e.g., ¶ 0142; See also, e.g., Fig(s). 4); and
control the execution of the application based on the received control signal (See, e.g., ¶ 0142; See also, e.g., Fig(s). 4).
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.
Claim(s) 2-7, 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the cited reference(s) of the parent claim(s) in view of HOFFEND, III ET AL. (US 20130015315 A1) (hereinafter “HOFFEND”).
With respect to Claim(s) 2, 16, SAIKI teaches the BRI of the parent claim(s).
However, SAIKI is lacking the explicit language of:
wherein
the first sensor arrangement is configured to measure angular rate of the controller with a first sensing scale,
and
the second sensor arrangement is configured to measure angular rate of the controller with a second sensing scale different from the first sensing scale.
HOFFEND teaches a lift assembly and the BRI of:
a first sensor arrangement is configured to measure angular rate of the controller with a first sensing scale, and a second sensor arrangement is configured to measure angular rate of the controller with a second sensing scale different from the first sensing scale (See, e.g., ¶ 0134).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art, at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify SAIKI to include a first sensor arrangement is configured to measure angular rate of the controller with a first sensing scale, and a second sensor arrangement is configured to measure angular rate of the controller with a second sensing scale different from the first sensing scale.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify SAIKI because it would be beneficial to monitoring movement of the load. Further, it would be obvious to combine prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, simply substitute one known element for another to obtain predictable results, use known techniques to improve similar devices in the same way, and/or apply a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
With respect to Claim(s) 3, 17, SAIKI, HOFFEND teaches the BRI of the parent claim(s).
HOFFEND further teaches the BRI of:
wherein
the first sensing scale and second sensing scale are fixed during obtaining the first measurement data and the second measurement data (See, e.g., ¶ 0134).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art, at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify SAIKI to include wherein the first sensing scale and second sensing scale are fixed during obtaining the first measurement data and the second measurement data.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify SAIKI because it would be beneficial to monitoring movement of the load. Further, it would be obvious to combine prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, simply substitute one known element for another to obtain predictable results, use known techniques to improve similar devices in the same way, and/or apply a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
With respect to Claim(s) 4, 18, SAIKI, HOFFEND teaches the BRI of the parent claim(s).
SAIKI further teaches the BRI of:
wherein
the processing circuitry is configured to:
utilize at least the first measurement data associated with the first sensing scale smaller than the second sensing scale in generating the control signal if the measured angular rate does not exceed the first sensing scale (See, e.g., Fig(s). 6).
With respect to Claim(s) 5, 19, SAIKI, HOFFEND teaches the BRI of the parent claim(s).
SAIKI further teaches the BRI of:
wherein
the processing circuitry is configured to:
utilize the first measurement data but not the second measurement data in generating the control signal if the measured angular rate does not exceed the first sensing scale (See, e.g., Fig(s). 6).
With respect to Claim(s) 6, 20, SAIKI, HOFFEND teaches the BRI of the parent claim(s).
SAIKI further teaches the BRI of:
wherein
the processing circuitry is configured to:
if the measured angular rate exceeds the first sensing scale, utilize the second measurement data associated with the second sensing scale but not the first measurement data in generating the control signal (See, e.g., Fig(s). 6).
With respect to Claim(s) 7, SAIKI, HOFFEND teaches the BRI of the parent claim(s).
SAIKI further teaches the BRI of:
wherein
the processing circuitry is configured to:
determine, based on the first measurement data, a first time period during which the measured angular rate does not exceed the first sensing scale (See, e.g., Fig(s). 6);
based on the determining, utilize at least the first measurement data in generating the control signal for the first time period (See, e.g., Fig(s). 6);
determine, based on the first measurement data, a second time period during which the measured angular rate exceeds the first sensing scale (See, e.g., Fig(s). 6);
and
based on the determining, utilize the second measurement data but not the first measurement data in generating the control signal for the second time period (See, e.g., Fig(s). 6).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAYMOND NIMOX whose telephone number is (469)295-9226. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu 10am-8pm CT.
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, ANDREW SCHECHTER can be reached at (571) 272-2302. 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.
RAYMOND NIMOX
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2857
/RAYMOND L NIMOX/Primary Examiner, Art Unit