DETAILED ACTION
Applicant’s arguments, filed 05/14/2026, have been fully considered. The following rejections and/or objections are either reiterated or newly applied. They constitute the complete set presently being applied to the instant application. Applicant has canceled claims 4-6 and 9-10.
Claims 1-3 and 7-8 are the current claims hereby under examination.
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/14/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-3 and 7-8 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.
Regarding claim 1, the claim recites that the wearable sensor assembly comprises at least one of an accelerometer, a gyroscope, and a magnetometer in lines 29-31. However, the claim also recites that the first joint sensor is configured to measure a joint angle between a waist and the femoral region of the subject in cooperation with the gyroscope of the wearable sensor assembly in lines 39-40. It is unclear which measurement sensor is required to meet the claim for these limitations. Is the wearable sensor assembly required to have the gyroscope to cooperate with the first joint sensor, or does the first joint sensor work in cooperation with at least one of the claimed measurement units (i.e., accelerometer, gyroscope, magnetometer) and not limited to only the gyroscope? For examination purposes, the claim will be interpreted such that the wearable sensor assembly comprises at least one of an accelerometer, a gyroscope, and a magnetometer, and the joint sensor measures in cooperation with the at least one accelerometer, gyroscope, and magnetometer. Claims 2-3 and 7-8 are also rejected due to their dependence on claim 1.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barralon (US 10376222), Bellman (US 10272284), and Lee (US 20120116258).
Regarding claim 1, 7, and 8, Barralon discloses a posture balance measurement system comprising:
a plate on which a subject is configured to stand upright (Fig. 1, platform 13);
a pressure sensor array mounted on the plate, and configured to measure a plantar pressure of the subject (Col 7, lines 40-48);
a wearable sensor assembly configured to measure a balance information of the subject (Fig. 1, wearable module 11; Col 7, lines 19-30);
controller circuitry comprising at least one processor (Col 3, lines 10-29, including a processing means) and a memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the controller circuitry (Col 5, lines 39-44) to:
receive the plantar pressure data from the pressure sensor array and the balance information from the wearable sensor assembly; and determine posture balance information of the subject based on the plantar pressure data and the balance information (Col 8, line 61 – Col 9, line 7, wherein the stability index is calculated from the plantar pressure and position/orientation of the wearable sensors);
wherein the wearable sensor assembly is configured to measure a balance state of the subject in which the subject's standing posture or balance posture changes during the test performance while the subject is standing upright on the plate (Col 8, line 61 – Col 9, line 7, wherein the stability index is calculated from the plantar pressure and position/orientation of the wearable sensors);
wherein the wearable sensor assembly comprises at least one of accelerometer, gyroscope, and magnetometer (Col 7, lines 19-35, including an IMU composed of 3D accelerometers and gyroscope).
With regards to the claim limitations of claims 1, 7, and 8, Barralon discloses wearable sensors fixed to a belt (Fig. 1) or another wearable device for alternative fixing or attaching means (Col 6, lines 32-38) for use in other stabilometric platforms (Col 1, lines 20-25). Barralon fails to explicitly disclose a harness, or a chair-shaped support body, with at least three straps that fix a body of the subject to a support frame via a plurality of wires. Barralon further fails to disclose the wearable sensor assembly further comprises a first joint sensor disposed at a femoral region of the subject to measure a joint angle, a second joint sensor disposed at a shin of the subject to measure a joint angle, and a third joint sensor disposed at a foot of the subject.
Bellman teaches a gait training apparatus and is analogous to Barralon as they are in the same field of measuring patient movement. Bellman teaches a support frame comprising a lower frame, a side frame extending upwardly from the lower frame, and a plurality of upper frames connected to an upper portion of the side frame (Fig. 1, weight support assembly 10 with U-shaped base 23, center stanchion 24, and yoke 25 containing a plurality of frames, see Fig. 1 below).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Two sets of two fasteners)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Plurality of Upper frames)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
597
470
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The user is connected to the frame via a two sets of two fasteners (see Fig. 1 above, fasteners 11) that connect to a harness suspended by the fasteners, the harness being configured to fix and support the subject’s body to reduce a fall risk during a test performance (Fig. 1, harness 33 with straps around the waist and connected to two shoulder straps (fasteners) that connect to the plurality of frames; Col 4, lines 37-47, wherein the fasteners are used to prevent the patient from falling). Additionally, the harness has a bottom fixed underneath the waist of the user, which Examiner interprets as a “chair-shaped support body”. The combination of Barralon and Bellman would necessarily have the wearable sensor assembly positioned on the harness as Barralon already discloses a wearable sensor on a strap configured around the waist. Additionally, as the frame is separate from the treadmill the user is on in Fig. 1, Bellman suggests the frame may be configured to be used with other gait training devices or for a user to be positioned on the floor (Col 5, lines 1-13). Barralon is concerned with measuring stability and suggests that the balance system may be applicable to other diagnostic devices and other fixing means for the sensors as described above, and Bellman teaches a frame and harness system to prevent a user from falling. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Barralon to incorporate the frame and harness as taught by Bellman, the benefit in preventing the user from falling.
Lee teaches a lower-limb rehabilitation apparatus for measuring joint angles, and Lee is analogous to Barralon and Bellman as they are all in the same field of measuring patient movement. Lee teaches wherein the apparatus includes a first joint sensor at a femoral region of the subject, a second joint sensor at a shin of the subject, and a third joint sensor at a foot of the subject. The sensors measure angles at the joints (Figs. 6-7 and Paragraphs 0066-0067; Paragraph 0062, wherein the joint goniometers are placed at the hip, knee and ankle; Paragraph 0062, wherein the hip joint goniometer measures the angle of the hip, the knee joint goniometer measures the angle of the knee, and the ankle joint goniometer measures the angle of the ankle). This combination of a wearable sensor that includes a gyroscope of Barralon and the lower joint sensors of Lee would necessarily communicate with each other to measure the joint angles as Barralon and Lee are concerned with measuring posture and balance. As Barralon is concerned with assessing, training, and aiding in the rehabilitation of postural balance of subjects (Col 1, lines 12-19), Lee discusses this configuration of joint sensors is useful for rehabilitation of the lower limbs (Paragraphs 0013-0015). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Barralon and Bellman to incorporate the joint goniometers of Lee to aid in lower-limb rehabilitation.
Regarding claim 8, Barralon in view of Bellman and Lee further discloses wherein the wearable sensor assembly is attached to the third strap (Barralon: Fig. 1, wearable sensor 11 fixed to belt; As Barralon attaches the sensor assembly to the waist belt as shown in Fig. 1, the combination of Barralon and Bellman would disclose the sensor assembly being attached to the third strap of the harness as that also is in a similar location as Barralon’s wearable sensor).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barralon (US 10376222), Bellman (US 10272284), and Lee (US 20120116258) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Berme (US 6389883).
Regarding claim 2, Barralon as modified further discloses wherein the pressure sensor array comprises:
a posture controller comprising a processor configured to execute (Col 3, lines 22-29, the system having a processing means for extracting information from the reference signal), an initial reference for subsequent plantar pressure measurements (Col 8, lines 56-60, wherein the stability is measured relating positions through a reference signal);
a pressure change analyzer configured to analyze a pressure change based a plurality of plantar pressure measurements obtained over time relative to the initial reference (Col 7, lines 40-54, wherein pressure distribution is measured; Col 8, lines 56-60, wherein the stability is measured relating positions through a reference signal); and
a pressure information storage configured to store the measured plantar pressure and the pressure change (Fig. 5, data management 682; Col 13, line 65; While Barralon does not explicitly disclose a means of storage, Barralon requires storing and retrieving data. Thus, Barralon discloses a storing the measured data).
Barralon fails to explicitly disclose an initialization routine that sets a measurement output of the pressure sensor array as an initial reference.
Berme is in the same field of measuring patient movement as Barralon, Bellman, and Lee. Berme teaches a system for analyzing balance and stability of a subject (Abstract). The system includes a platform the subject stands on to measure stability and plantar pressure, wherein the subject stands still on the platform with eyes open. This “normal stability” test is used as a comparison for further tests (Col 5, lines 22-51). As Barralon is concerned with measuring balance compared to a reference signal, Berme introduces a method of analyzing balance by having the subject complete a normal stability test for comparison to later tests. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Barralon, Bellman, and Lee to incorporate a normal stability measurement for comparison as taught by Berme, the benefit being tracking the subject over time to their own measurements.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barralon (US 10376222), Bellman (US 10272284), and Lee (US 20120116258) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hatlestad (US 20090312973).
Regarding claim 3, Barralon as modified further discloses wherein the balance measurement unit comprises:
a balance information initializer comprising a processor configured to execute (Col 3, lines 22-29, the system having a processing means for extracting information from the reference signal), an initial reference for subsequent balance state measurements (Col 8, lines 56-60, wherein the stability is measured relating positions through a reference signal);
a balance change analyzer configured to analyze a balance change based on a plurality of balance state measurements obtained over time relative to the initial reference (Fig. 1, wearable module 11; Col 6, lines 15-29, wherein there are two wearable devices); and
a balance information storage configured to store the measured balance state and the balance change (Fig. 5, data management 682; Col 13, line 65; While Barralon does not explicitly disclose a means of storage, Barralon requires storing and retrieving data. Thus, Barralon discloses a storage part).
Barralon fails to explicitly disclose an initialization routine that sets a measurement output of the pressure sensor array as an initial reference.
Hatlestad is in the same field of measuring patient movement as Barralon, Bellman, and Lee. Hatlestad teaches a system for automatically calibrate a posture of a subject (Abstract). The subject wears an accelerometer that calibrates a posture by using information obtained in a particular posture, such as standing. Further posture data can then be calculated relative to the calibrated data (Paragraphs 0047-0048). As Barralon is concerned with measuring balance compared to a reference signal, Hatlestad introduces a method of calibrating an accelerometer to express posture data relative to the calibration. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Barralon, Bellman, and Lee to incorporate a normal stability measurement for comparison as taught by Hatlestad, the benefit being tracking the subject over time to their own measurements.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 1, filed 05/14/2026, with respect to the claim objections have been fully considered and are persuasive. Applicant has amended the claims per the suggestion of the Examiner. The objection of the claims has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 1-3, filed 05/14/2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. §112b rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. Applicant has amended the language as to where the joint sensors are placed. Applicant has clarified how the posture controller adjusts a posture of the plate by initializing the sensor array. Applicant has clarified how the balance information initializer initializes the wearable sensor assembly. The rejection of the claims has been withdrawn. However, a new rejection has been applied.
Examiner acknowledges Applicant replacing the first, second, and third “fixing part” elements, interpreted under 112(f) as laid out in the Office Action mailed 03/31/2026, with first, second, and third straps. Thus, these elements are no longer interpreted under 112(f).
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 4-9, filed 05/14/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-3 and 7-8 under 35 U.S.C. §103 have been fully considered and are persuasive.
Applicant argues, see page 7, that the combination of references fails to teach a plurality of wires comprising a first, second, and third wire fixed to a plurality of upper frames. Examiner agrees; therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. Upon further consideration of the claims, a new ground(s) of rejection is made over Barralon in view of Bellman and Lee, as disclosed above.
Applicant argues, see page 8, that the combination of Barralon and Lee does not teach or suggest the joint sensors communicating with the gyroscope attached to the harness. Barralon teaches that a gyroscope is placed on the waist of the subject, and Lee discloses joint goniometers, including a hip joint goniometer, to measure the lower joint angles. This combination of sensors would necessarily communicate with each other as Barralon and Lee are concerned with measuring posture and balance.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NOAH MICHAEL HEALY whose telephone number is (703)756-5534. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30am - 5:30pm ET.
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 Sims can be reached at (571)272-7540. 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.
/NOAH M HEALY/Examiner, Art Unit 3791
/JASON M SIMS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights