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 amendments filed 6/18/2026 have been entered. Accordingly, claims 1-20 are pending in the current application. The amendments have overcome the claim objections and 112b rejections previously set forth in the non-final office action dated 3/18/2026. However, the Examiner would like to note the new 112 rejections now being applied as necessitated by the recent amendments.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 7, 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 7 recites the following limitation(s) of “the driving of the action unit for at least one of promotion or suppression of the movement of the body part of the first user, and the control unit is further configured to delay, based on an increase of the driving force, the third point of time, for the promotion of the movement of the body part of the first user, and advance, based on the increase of the driving force, sets the fourth point of time for the suppression of the movement of the body part of the first use” – however it is unclear what the meaning behind “promotion”, “suppression” and “advance, based on increase of the driving” is and how it relates to the movement of the body part. Does promotion of movement mean activating the movement? Does suppression of the movement mean the movement is halted or slowed down? What is the difference between “promotion of the movement” and “advance, based on the increase of the driving force”? Does the term “promotion” and “advance” mean entirely different motions? Furthermore, the terms/phrases “promotion” and “advance, based on increase of the driving force” are never adequately presented and/or described in Applicant’s specification.
Claims 7, 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 7, claim 7 recites the following limitation(s) of “the driving of the action unit for at least one of promotion or suppression of the movement of the body part of the first user, and the control unit is further configured to delay, based on an increase of the driving force, the third point of time, for the promotion of the movement of the body part of the first user, and advance, based on the increase of the driving force, sets the fourth point of time for the suppression of the movement of the body part of the first use” – however the terms/phrases “promotion” and “advance, based on increase of the driving force”, as well as the concept of “sets the fourth point of time for the suppression of movement” are never adequately presented and/or described in Applicant’s specification.
Regarding claim 8, claim 8 recites the limitation(s) of “wherein the reference signal indicates one of a first situation associated with the movement or a second situation associated with the movement, the first situation is for the first user to perform the movement by moving the body part of the first user, the second situation is for the first user to prohibit the movement, and the control unit is further configured to compare the one of the first situation or the second situation with one presence or absence of the first movement signal and control the action unit based on a result of the comparison” – however there is no description in Applicant’s specification of the system prohibiting the movement, nor any description of how the control system compares the first and second situation with presence of absence of the first movement signal. Claims 9-10 are similarly rejected based on dependency to claim 8.
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.
Claim(s) 1-12, 14, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Einarsson et al. (US 2016/0302686 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Einarsson discloses an information processing apparatus (prosthetic or orthotic device (POD) comprising a control system 300 comprising a central processing unit 405, wherein the control unit 300 is configured to control operation of an actuator in a POD based on signals from EMG sensors, Paragraph 0065 and Figures 1-3), comprising a control unit (control unit 300, Paragraph 0065) configured to: acquire a first signal indicating a voluntary movement of a first user (a first EMG signal is produced by one or more voluntary contractions of the first muscle, therefore indicative of a voluntary movement of a user, Paragraph 0047); determine, based on the first signal, a prediction signal indicating a predicted movement of the first user (the controller 305 may be configured to determine, based on the received EMG signal, a user’s intention to transition from a stance phase toa a swing phase, Paragraph 0108); set, based on a first point of time associated with the first signal and a second point of time associated with the predication signal, a third point of time in a period from the first point of time to the second point of time (the controller 305 and sensor module 302 can be configured to measure and/or analyze the signals in predefined time intervals, or the window of time can end in response to a user event, muscular event, bodily event a set time, etc., therefore the control system 305 is fully capable of set a first, second and third time points with the associated EMG signals, Paragraph 0073); and control an action unit at the third point of time (the controller 305 and/or control drive module 310 may operate the actuator 316 to respond proportionally to signals of the EMG sensors and/or other sensors of the sensor module 302, Paragraph 0083), wherein the action unit is associated with a body part of the first user and the control of the action unit is for a movement of the body part of the first user (muscle contractions, detected by the sensor module, can be used to directly control an actuator, such as the actuator 316, associated with a joint. As described above, sensors such as in the sensor module 302 can be implanted in any muscle to measure EMG signals of that muscles, sensors can be placed in any muscle associated with the upper leg-muscle and accordingly, the activation of the muscle associated with the upper-leg can be used to control the actuation of a joint in the lower leg POD of that same leg, such as the POD 100; see also Paragraph 0054 and Figure 1B describing the POD 100 as being an orthotic device attachable to a body part).
Regarding claim 2, Einarsson further teaches wherein the control unit is further configured to detect, based on the first signal, a first movement signal associated with the voluntary movement of the first user and set, based on a detection timing of the first movement signal (the controller 305 and sensor module 302 can be configured to measure and/or analyze the signals in predefined time intervals, or the window of time can end in response to a user event, muscular event, bodily event a set time, etc., therefore the control system 305 is fully capable of setting various detecting timing sequences, Paragraph 0073)
Regarding claim 3, Einarsson further teaches wherein the control unit is further configured to control, based on detection of the first movement signal, and the second point of time, the action unit to one of accelerate or decelerate the movement of the body part of the user (the EMG signals may be used for control of the POD 100 such as acceleration, Paragraph 0038).
Regarding claim 4, Einarsson further teaches wherein the control unit is further configured to acquire a reference signal associated with movement of the body part of the first user and control the action unit based on the reference signal (EMG signals are produced by one or more voluntary contractions of the first muscle, therefore indicative of a voluntary movement of a user, and used by the controller to drive the POD based on the detected EMG signals, Paragraph 0047).
Regarding claim 5, Einarsson further teaches wherein the reference signal indicates a timing of the movement of the body part of the first user, and the control unit is further configured to set, based on the timing movement of the body part of the user, at least one of the third point of time to control the action unit or a fourth point of time to terminate control on the action unit (the controller 305 and sensor module 302 can be configured to measure and/or analyze the signals in predefined time intervals, or the window of time can end in response to a user event, muscular event, bodily event a set time, etc., therefore the control system 305 is fully capable of setting a first, second, third, and/or fourth time points with the associated EMG signals, Paragraph 0073)).
Regarding claim 6, Einarsson further teaches wherein the control unit is further configured to set least one of the third point of time or the fourth point of time in accordance with a driving force to drive the action unit (“the EMG and other measurements are used to affect the POD. Any of the measurements may be processed, for example by the controller, and used, for example to control, the POD. Such controls may affect the response (e.g. drive) of an actuator. Actuator responses can be based on the EMG signals in a variety of ways, for example the actuator response may be proportional to characteristics of a measured EMG signal such as amplitude (minimum, maximum, average, etc.), frequency, response time, rate of change, etc. Various aspects of the POD may be affected, such as knee and/or ankle positions, angle, velocity, acceleration, moment/torque, etc.”. Paragraph 0038).
Regarding claim 7, Einarsson further teaches the driving of the action unit for at least one of promotion or suppression of the movement of the body part of the first user, and the control unit is further configured to delay, based on an increase of the driving force, the third point of time, for the promotion of the movement of the body part of the first user, and advance, based on the increase of the driving force, sets the fourth point of time for the suppression of the movement of the body part of the first user (the Examiner notes both the 112a and 112b rejections presented above for this particular claim; however notes that as Einarsson’s device comprising a control system 300 comprising a central processing unit 405, wherein the control unit 300 is configured to control operation of an actuator in a POD based on signals from EMG sensors, it would be fully capable of promoting and/or suppressing movement of the body part, delay based on increasing force, and set various time points, Paragraph 0065 and Figures 1-3).
Regarding claim 8, Einarsson further teaches wherein the reference signal indicates one of a first situation associated with the movement or a second situation associated with the movement, the first situation is for the first user to perform the movement by moving the body part of the first user, the second situation is for the first user to prohibit the movement, and the control unit is further configured to compare the one of the first situation or the second situation with one presence or absence of the first movement signal and control the action unit based on a result of the comparison (the Examiner notes the 112a and 112b rejections presented above for this particular limitation; however notes that as Einarsson’s device comprising a control system 300 comprising a central processing unit 405, wherein the control unit 300 is configured to control operation of an actuator in a POD based on signals from EMG sensors, it would be fully capable of having various situations and comparing said situations, Paragraph 0065 and Figures 1-3).
Regarding claim 9, Einarsson further teaches wherein the control unit is further configured to control the action unit to move the body part of the first user to perform the movement in a case where the first movement signal is absent and the reference signal indicates the first (the Examiner notes the 112a and 112b rejections presented above for this particular limitation; however notes that as Einarsson’s device comprising a control system 300 comprising a central processing unit 405, wherein the control unit 300 is configured to control operation of an actuator in a POD based on signals from EMG sensors, it would be fully capable of preforming said movement of body part when movement signal is absent but a reference signal is, Paragraph 0065 and Figures 1-3).
Regarding claim 10, Einarsson further teaches wherein the control unit is further configured to control the action unit to prohibit the body part of the first user to perform the movement in a case where the first movement signal is present and the reference signal indicates the second (the Examiner notes the 112a and 112b rejections presented above for this particular limitation; however notes that as Einarsson’s device comprising a control system 300 comprising a central processing unit 405, wherein the control unit 300 is configured to control operation of an actuator in a POD based on signals from EMG sensors, it would be fully capable of prohibiting said movement of body part when movement signal is present but a reference signal is, Paragraph 0065 and Figures 1-3).
Regarding claim 11, Einarsson further teaches wherein the reference signal is a signal indicates a result of sensing information associated with a sensor, the result of the sensing information is for the first user to determine whether or not to move the body part of the user and senses the sensing information (the controller 305 and/or control drive module 310 may operate the actuator 316 to respond proportionally to signals of the EMG sensors and/or other sensors of the sensor module 302, Paragraph 0083)
Regarding claim 12, Einarsson further teaches wherein the movement of the body part of the first user includes an input operation for an application, and the reference signal is a signal indicating a timing of the input operation (the controller 305 and sensor module 302 can be configured to measure and/or analyze the signals in predefined time intervals, or the window of time can end in response to a user event, muscular event, bodily event a set time, etc., therefore the control system 305 is fully capable of setting a first, second, third, and/or fourth time points with the associated EMG signals, Paragraph 0073).
Regarding claim 14, Einarsson further teaches wherein the first signal includes at least one of an electromyography signal of the first user (a first EMG signal is produced by one or more voluntary contractions of the first muscle, therefore indicative of a voluntary movement of a user, Paragraph 0047)).
Regarding claim 19, Einarsson discloses an information processing method by a computer system (prosthetic or orthotic device (POD) comprising a control system 300 comprising a central processing unit 405, wherein the control unit 300 is configured to control operation of an actuator in a POD based on signals from EMG sensors, Paragraph 0065 and Figures 1-3), acquiring a signal indicating a voluntary movement of a first user (a first EMG signal is produced by one or more voluntary contractions of the first muscle, therefore indicative of a voluntary movement of a user, Paragraph 0047); determining, based on the signal, a prediction signal indicating a predicted movement of the first user (the controller 305 may be configured to determine, based on the received EMG signal, a user’s intention to transition from a stance phase toa a swing phase, Paragraph 0108); setting, based on a first point of time associated with the signal and a second point of time associated with the predication signal, a third point of time in a period from the first point of time to the second point of time (the controller 305 and sensor module 302 can be configured to measure and/or analyze the signals in predefined time intervals, or the window of time can end in response to a user event, muscular event, bodily event a set time, etc., therefore the control system 305 is fully capable of set a first, second and third time points with the associated EMG signals, Paragraph 0073); controlling an action unit at the third point of time (the controller 305 and/or control drive module 310 may operate the actuator 316 to respond proportionally to signals of the EMG sensors and/or other sensors of the sensor module 302, Paragraph 0083), wherein the action unit is associated with a body part of the first user and the control of the action unit is for a movement of the body part of the first user (muscle contractions, detected by the sensor module, can be used to directly control an actuator, such as the actuator 316, associated with a joint. As described above, sensors such as in the sensor module 302 can be implanted in any muscle to measure EMG signals of that muscles, sensors can be placed in any muscle associated with the upper leg-muscle and accordingly, the activation of the muscle associated with the upper-leg can be used to control the actuation of a joint in the lower leg POD of that same leg, such as the POD 100; see also Paragraph 0054 and Figure 1B describing the POD 100 as being an orthotic device attachable to a body part).
Regarding claim 20, Einarsson discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage thereon, computer-executable instructions which, when executed by a computer, cause the computer to execute operations (see Paragraph 0169 describing the use of a computer-readable storage and computer executing instructions), the operations comprising: (brain command processing unit 11 reads the brain command pattern data 13 from the first storage unit 12, Page 4 paragraph 8) acquiring a signal indicating a voluntary movement of a first user (a first EMG signal is produced by one or more voluntary contractions of the first muscle, therefore indicative of a voluntary movement of a user, Paragraph 0047); determining, based on the signal, a prediction signal indicating a predicted movement of the first user (the controller 305 may be configured to determine, based on the received EMG signal, a user’s intention to transition from a stance phase toa a swing phase, Paragraph 0108); setting, based on a first point of time associated with the signal and a second point of time associated with the predication signal, a third point of time in a period from the first point of time to the second point of time (the controller 305 and sensor module 302 can be configured to measure and/or analyze the signals in predefined time intervals, or the window of time can end in response to a user event, muscular event, bodily event a set time, etc., therefore the control system 305 is fully capable of set a first, second and third time points with the associated EMG signals, Paragraph 0073); controlling an action unit at the third point of time (the controller 305 and/or control drive module 310 may operate the actuator 316 to respond proportionally to signals of the EMG sensors and/or other sensors of the sensor module 302, Paragraph 0083), wherein the action unit is associated with a body part of the first user and the control of the action unit is for a movement of the body part of the first user (muscle contractions, detected by the sensor module, can be used to directly control an actuator, such as the actuator 316, associated with a joint. As described above, sensors such as in the sensor module 302 can be implanted in any muscle to measure EMG signals of that muscles, sensors can be placed in any muscle associated with the upper leg-muscle and accordingly, the activation of the muscle associated with the upper-leg can be used to control the actuation of a joint in the lower leg POD of that same leg, such as the POD 100; see also Paragraph 0054 and Figure 1B describing the POD 100 as being an orthotic device attachable to a body part).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13 and 15-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 13, Einarsson is silent wherein the control unit is further configured to acquire, as, the reference signal, a second movement signal based on detection of a second signal, the second signal indicates voluntary movement of a second user, and the second user is different than the first user. As Einarsson’s device operates using detected EMG signals of a single user, to therefore be used to predict various user motions and adjust the system accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would have not been led to use said device/system for the detecting of signals from a second user.
Regarding claims 15-18, although Einarsson mentions varying technologies may be used, such as electromagnetic waves or magnetic fields (Paragraph 0167), Einarsson is silent on electrically change the magnetic field between the first magnetic field action unit and a second magnetic field action unit; and control the first magnetic field action unit based on the electrical change of the magnetic field and the second magnetic field action unit is separate from the first.
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 SARAH B LEDERER whose telephone number is 571-272-7274. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday, 7:30 AM - 4:30 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, Brandy Lee can be reached on (571)-270-7410. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SARAH B LEDERER/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/MARGARET M LUARCA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights