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 to the claims and specification filed 12 March 2026 has been entered. Claim(s) 1-11, 13-14, 18, and 21 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome each and every rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102 previously set forth in the Office Action mailed 16 December 2025.
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.
Claim 10 is 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 10 recites the limitation “the control signal” in line 3 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation of the claim. The claim is currently interpreted as depending from claim 9, which introduces the concept of transmitting a control signal for the measurement of the target physical ability.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Utilizing the two step process adopted by the Supreme Court (Alice Corp vs CLS Bank Int'l, US
Supreme Court, 110 USPQ2d 1976 (2014) and the recent 101 guideline Federal Register Vol. 84, No., Jan
2019)), determination of the subject matter eligibility under the 35 U.S.C. 101 is as follows: Specifically, the Step 1 requires claim belongs to one of the four statutory categories (process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter). If Step 1 is satisfied, then in the first part of Step 2A (Prong One), identification of any judicial recognized exceptions in the claim is made. If any limitation in the claim is identified as judicial recognized exception, then in the second part of Step 2A (Prong Two), determination is made whether the identified judicial exception is being integrated into practical application. If the identified judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application, then in Step 2B, the claim is further evaluated to see if the additional elements, individually and in combination provide "inventive concept" that would amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. If the element and combination of elements do not amount to significantly more than the judicial recognized exception itself, then the claim is ineligible under the 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claims 1-11, 13-14, 18, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception, in this case an abstract idea, without significantly more. The claim recite(s) "recognize that the user ends walking based on the received sensor data, and when it is recognized that the user ends walking, complete a collection of sensor data for measuring a walking ability of the user; information on the walking ability of the user based on sensor data obtained up to a point in time at which an end of the walking is recognized; calculate a temporal gait index based on first sensor data including motion information of the user received from the wearable device; calculate a spatial gait index based on second sensor data regarding a hip joint angle of the user received from the wearable device; and calculate the physical ability information based on the temporal gait index and the spatial gait index". This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application and the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Claim 1 satisfies Step 1, namely the claim is directed to one of the four statutory classes, machine. Following Step 2A Prong one, any judicial exceptions are identified in the claims. In claim 1, the limitations “recognize that the user ends walking based on the received sensor data, and when it is recognized that the user ends walking, complete a collection of sensor data for measuring a walking ability of the user; information on the walking ability of the user based on sensor data obtained up to a point in time at which an end of the walking is recognized; calculate a temporal gait index based on first sensor data including motion information of the user received from the wearable device; calculate a spatial gait index based on second sensor data regarding a hip joint angle of the user received from the wearable device; and calculate the physical ability information based on the temporal gait index and the spatial gait index" are abstract ideas as they are directed to a mental process and mathematical concept, as recognizing that a user has ended walking and completing sensor data upon that recognition may be performed in the human mind, such as by observing an end to the periodic sensor data associated with walking and by choosing to ignore any data measured beyond this point, while determining information and each of the calculations as claimed may be performed in the human mind using observations or mathematical transformations of the collected data such as peak to peak time, number of peaks in a given time period, variance between peak amplitudes, etc.. With the identification of an abstract idea, the next phase is to proceed Step 2A, Prong Two, wherewith additional elements and taken as a whole, evaluation occurs of whether the identified abstract idea is integrated into a practical application.
In Step 2A, Prong Two, the claim does not recite any additional elements or evidence that amounts to significantly more than the judicial exception. Besides the abstract idea, the claim recites the additional elements “a communication module, comprising communication circuitry, configured to receive sensor data from a wearable device; at least one processor, comprising processing circuitry, configured individually and/or collectively to calculate physical ability information of a user based on the sensor data; and a display module, comprising a display, configured to output the physical ability information” and “wherein the second sensor data comprises information on the hip joint angle of the user measured by an angle sensor of the wearable device during a walking process of the user performed from a start point to an end point”.
However, these components may be seen as the use of well-understood, routine, or conventional elements to perform a non-mental process in order to perform necessary data gathering for the mental process step or outputting a result of the mental process step. In this case, much like the examples given in MPEP 2106.04(d)(2)(c) and 2106.05(g) the receiving of sensor data from a wearable device via a communication module may be seen as “obtaining input for an equation” akin to In re Grams where the abstract “calculating” steps serve as the equation, such that these limitations are extra-solution activity and thus do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The end result of use of the system is only the generic “output the physical ability information” using the display module which may be any generic output. As the calculation and output of physical ability information is not defined as requiring any further action, such as a form of prophylaxis or treatment or an improvement to a computer or other technology, the claim limitations do not integrate the judicial exception into any practical application.
Regarding “at least one processor comprising processing circuitry, configured individually and/or collectively to calculate physical ability information of a user based on the sensor data”, the limitation amounts to nothing more than an instruction to apply the abstract idea using a generic computer, which does not render an abstract idea eligible. The steps performed by the at least one processor are, as claimed, capable of being performed in the human mind similar to the examples given in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(A)-(C), wherein it is described that “a claim to ‘collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis’ where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind” recites a mental process and that claims which merely use a computer as a tool to perform a mental process are not eligible when “there is nothing in the claims themselves that foreclose them from being performed by a human, mentally or with pen and paper” such as “mental processes of parsing and comparing data” when the steps are recited at a high level of generality and a computer is used merely as a tool to perform the processes. In this case, there is no detail of the calculation steps which precludes the broadly claimed calculating from being performed in the human mind while observing collected data.
Furthermore, while the abstract idea itself may be an improvement over the existing technology, per Genetic Technologies Limited v. Merial LLC (Fed Cir., 2016) the inventive concept of step 2 of the Alice/Mayo analysis cannot be supplied by the abstract idea. The inventive concept necessary at step two of the Mayo/Alice analysis cannot be furnished by the unpatentable abstract idea itself. That is, under the Mayo/Alice framework, a claim directed to a newly discovered abstract idea cannot rely on the novelty of that discovery for the inventive concept necessary for patent eligibility; instead, the application must provide something inventive, beyond mere “well-understood, routine, conventional activity.” Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1294; see also Myriad, 133 S. Ct. at 2117; Ariosa, 788 F.3d at 1379. For this reason, the abstract calculation limitations may not be seen as an improvement which integrates the judicial exception into a practical application. Consequently, with the identified abstract idea not being integrated into a practical application, the next step is Step 2B, evaluating whether the additional elements provide "inventive concept" that would amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim elements are recited with a high level of generality (as written, each claimed step performed by the at least one processor may be performed by a person in an undefined manner including viewing collected data and determining, for example, gait symmetry based on the values of hip joint angles for each leg) that there are no meaningful limitations to the abstract idea. Consequently, with the identified abstract idea not being integrated into a practical application, the next step is Step 2B, evaluating whether the additional elements provide "inventive concept" that would amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
In Step 2B, claim 1 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The limitation of “a communication module, comprising communication circuitry, configured to receive sensor data from a wearable device; at least one processor, comprising processing circuitry, configured individually and/or collectively to calculate physical ability information of a user based on the sensor data; and a display module, comprising a display, configured to output the physical ability information” and “wherein the second sensor data comprises information on the hip joint angle of the user measured by an angle sensor of the wearable device during a walking process of the user performed from a start point to an end point” constitutes extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, which does not amount to an inventive concept when the activity is well-understood, routine, or conventional, and are thus not indicative of integration into a practical application. The claim limitation constitutes adding a generic communication circuitry, processing circuitry, and display, which Carbo (US 20240172963 A1) demonstrates as well-understood, routine, or conventional in its description of common electronic parts which can serve to interconnect a processor and sensor (Paragraph 0099, 0125, 0205-- a processor 1304 electrically coupled to at least one IMU 1308 via a serial communication bus 1310 (e.g., an I2C protocol, etc.)… electrical circuitry forming a communications device (e.g., a modem, communications switch, or optical-electrical equipment)), a processor as a common and commercially available electronic component (Paragraph 0205-- a processor or microprocessor can be substituted for any “control circuit,” which may refer to, for example, hardwired circuitry, programmable circuitry (e.g., a computer processor including one or more individual instruction processing cores, processing unit, processor, microcontroller, microcontroller unit, controller, digital signal processor (DSP), programmable logic device (PLD), programmable logic array (PLA), or field programmable gate array (FPGA)), state machine circuitry, firmware that stores instructions executed by programmable circuitry, and any combination thereof), and a display device as a known element of a computing device or similar electronic device (Paragraph 0119, 0205, 0208-- “displaying,” or the like, refer to the action and processes of a computer system, or similar electronic computing device, that manipulates and transforms data represented as physical (electronic) quantities within the computer system's registers and memories into other data similarly represented as physical quantities within the computer system memories or registers or other such information storage, transmission or display devices). It is additionally noted that Carbo additionally demonstrates that a wearable device including sensors may be seen to be well-understood, routine, or conventional (Paragraph 0045-- a wearable article (e.g., sleeves, braces, etc.)… the flexible circuits can be used to calibrate conventional sensors (e.g., IMUs, etc.)). The finding of these additional elements as well-understood, routine, or conventional is further supported by their presence in the form of common electronic elements in Seo (US 20200085666 A1; paragraph 0003—motion assistance apparatuses are known in the art, paragraph 0064—IMU, paragraph 0078—communicator may include an internal bus and an external bus, paragraph 0079—processing device may include a microprocessor, central processing unit…, paragraph 0133—display may be implemented by a touch screen, a liquid crystal display…). As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the present elements amount to no more than mere indications to apply the exception.
In Summary, claim 1 recites abstract idea without being integrated into a practical application, and does not provide additional elements that would amount to significantly more. As such, taken as a whole, the claim and is ineligible under the 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 for similar reasons to claim 1.
Claims 2-11, 13, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception, in this case an abstract idea, without significantly more. As each of these claims depends from claim 1, which was rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 in paragraph 8 of this action, these claims must be evaluated on whether they sufficiently add to the practical application of claim 1, or comprise significantly more than the limitations of claim 1.
Besides the abstract idea of claim 1, claims 2-7, 11, 13, and 21 provide additional abstract limitations relating to mathematical calculations which are capable of being performed in the human mind using data which is gathered using well-understood, routine, or conventional elements, including specifying what kind of parameter is calculated or various limits on how the parameter is calculated (e.g., by looking at a hip joint angle value at a point in time) which do not preclude the calculations from being performed in the human mind; claims 8-10 are directed toward pre-solution activity, namely toward steps necessary for the mere gathering of data to be utilized in the abstract limitations of performing calculations.
The claim element of claim 1 of an electronic device is recited with a high level of generality (as written, the actions of the at least one processor may be carried out by a person alone or with a generic computer in any undefined manner). The limitations of the dependent claims provide no practical application, nor do they provide meaningful limitations to the abstract idea.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception, in this case an abstract idea, without significantly more. The claim recite(s) "calculate a temporal gait index based on first sensor data including motion information of the user received from the wearable device; calculate a spatial gait index based on second sensor data regarding a hip joint angle of the user received from the wearable device; and calculate the physical ability information based on the temporal gait index and the spatial gait index". This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application and the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Claim 14 satisfies Step 1, namely the claim is directed to one of the four statutory classes, machine. Following Step 2A Prong one, any judicial exceptions are identified in the claims. In claim 14, the limitations "calculate a temporal gait index based on first sensor data including motion information of the user received from the wearable device; calculate a spatial gait index based on second sensor data regarding a hip joint angle of the user received from the wearable device; and calculate the physical ability information based on the temporal gait index and the spatial gait index" are abstract ideas as they are directed to a mental process and mathematical concept, as each of these calculations as claimed may be performed in the human mind using collected data. With the identification of an abstract idea, the next phase is to proceed Step 2A, Prong Two, wherewith additional elements and taken as a whole, evaluation occurs of whether the identified abstract idea is integrated into a practical application.
In Step 2A, Prong Two, the claim does not recite any additional elements or evidence that amounts to significantly more than the judicial exception. Besides the abstract idea, the claim recites the additional elements “A wearable device, comprising: a leg support frame configured to support a leg of a user when the wearable device is worn on the leg of the user; a sensor module, comprising at least one sensor, configured to obtain sensor data including motion information of the user in a physical ability measurement mode; a communication module, comprising communication circuitry, configured to transmit the sensor data to an electronic device and receive at least a control signal from the electronic device; and at least one processor comprising processing circuitry configured, individually and/or collectively to control the communication module and the sensor module, when the control signal, for a measurement of a target physical ability of the user, is received from the electronic device: to activate the physical ability measurement mode in response to the control signal; and to control the sensor module to obtain the sensor data in the physical ability measurement mode; to initialize the sensor data when the physical ability measurement mode is activated, and to control a recording of the sensor data to be started when a predetermined period of time for measuring the target physical ability elapses; wherein the sensor module is configured to obtain first sensor data including motion information of the user to be measured by an inertial sensor and second sensor data including a hip joint angle of the user to be measured by an angle sensor, and wherein the at least one processor further configured individually and/or collectively to control the communication module to transmit the first sensor data and the second sensor data to the electronic device in the physical ability measurement mode”.
However, these components may be seen as the use of well-understood, routine, or conventional elements to perform a non-mental process in order to perform necessary data gathering for the mental process step or outputting a result of the mental process step. In this case, much like the examples given in MPEP 2106.04(d)(2)(c) and 2106.05(g) obtaining sensor data from a wearable device and transmitting it via a communication module may be seen as “obtaining input for an equation” akin to In re Grams where the abstract “calculating” steps serve as the equation, such that these limitations are extra-solution activity and thus do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The end result of use of the system is only the calculation of physical ability information which may be include any generic output or none at all. As the calculation of physical ability information is not defined as requiring any further action, such as a form of prophylaxis or treatment or an improvement to a computer or other technology, the claim limitations do not integrate the judicial exception into any practical application.
Regarding “the electronic device can calculate…”, the limitation amounts to nothing more than an instruction to apply the abstract idea using a generic computer, which does not render an abstract idea eligible. The steps performed by the electronic device are, as claimed, capable of being performed in the human mind similar to the examples given in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(A)-(C), wherein it is described that “a claim to ‘collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis’ where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind” recites a mental process and that claims which merely use a computer as a tool to perform a mental process are not eligible when “there is nothing in the claims themselves that foreclose them from being performed by a human, mentally or with pen and paper” such as “mental processes of parsing and comparing data” when the steps are recited at a high level of generality and a computer is used merely as a tool to perform the processes. In this case, there is no detail of the calculation steps which precludes the broadly claimed calculating from being performed in the human mind while observing collected data.
Regarding “when the control signal, for a measurement of a target physical ability of the user, is received from the electronic device…”, while the limitations offer some discussion of altering operation of the device, they appear to be no different than the invocation of a general purpose computer as a tool to perform an existing process of turning an element on and off rather than providing a particular alteration in function. See MPEP 2106.05(f)(2) and (3). It is additionally noted that this limitation serves as extra-solution activity as it further describes the use of well-understood, routine, or conventional elements to perform a non-mental process in order to perform necessary data gathering for the mental process step, in this case generally performing activation of the sensor in order to record sensor data for use in the calculation steps.
Furthermore, while the abstract idea itself may be an improvement over the existing technology, per Genetic Technologies Limited v. Merial LLC (Fed Cir., 2016) the inventive concept of step 2 of the Alice/Mayo analysis cannot be supplied by the abstract idea. The inventive concept necessary at step two of the Mayo/Alice analysis cannot be furnished by the unpatentable abstract idea itself. That is, under the Mayo/Alice framework, a claim directed to a newly discovered abstract idea cannot rely on the novelty of that discovery for the inventive concept necessary for patent eligibility; instead, the application must provide something inventive, beyond mere “well-understood, routine, conventional activity.” Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1294; see also Myriad, 133 S. Ct. at 2117; Ariosa, 788 F.3d at 1379. For this reason, the abstract calculation limitations may not be seen as an improvement which integrates the judicial exception into a practical application. Consequently, with the identified abstract idea not being integrated into a practical application, the next step is Step 2B, evaluating whether the additional elements provide "inventive concept" that would amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim elements are recited with a high level of generality (as written, each claimed step performed by the electronic device may be performed by a person in an undefined manner including viewing collected data and determining, for example, gait symmetry based on the values of hip joint angles for each leg) that there are no meaningful limitations to the abstract idea. Consequently, with the identified abstract idea not being integrated into a practical application, the next step is Step 2B, evaluating whether the additional elements provide "inventive concept" that would amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
In Step 2B, claim 14 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The limitation of “A wearable device, comprising: a leg support frame configured to support a leg of a user when the wearable device is worn on the leg of the user; a sensor module, comprising at least one sensor, configured to obtain sensor data including motion information of the user in a physical ability measurement mode; a communication module, comprising communication circuitry, configured to transmit the sensor data to an electronic device and receive at least a control signal from the electronic device; and at least one processor comprising processing circuitry configured, individually and/or collectively to control the communication module and the sensor module, when the control signal, for a measurement of a target physical ability of the user, is received from the electronic device: to activate the physical ability measurement mode in response to the control signal; and to control the sensor module to obtain the sensor data in the physical ability measurement mode; to initialize the sensor data when the physical ability measurement mode is activated, and to control a recording of the sensor data to be started when a predetermined period of time for measuring the target physical ability elapses; wherein the sensor module is configured to obtain first sensor data including motion information of the user to be measured by an inertial sensor and second sensor data including a hip joint angle of the user to be measured by an angle sensor, and wherein the at least one processor further configured individually and/or collectively to control the communication module to transmit the first sensor data and the second sensor data to the electronic device in the physical ability measurement mode” constitutes extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, which does not amount to an inventive concept when the activity is well-understood, routine, or conventional, and are thus not indicative of integration into a practical application. The claim limitation constitutes adding a generic leg-worn device, sensors, communication circuitry, processor, and display, which Carbo (US 20240172963 A1) demonstrates as well-understood, routine, or conventional in its description of common electronic parts which can serve to interconnect a processor and sensor (Paragraph 0099, 0125, 0205-- a processor 1304 electrically coupled to at least one IMU 1308 via a serial communication bus 1310 (e.g., an I2C protocol, etc.)… electrical circuitry forming a communications device (e.g., a modem, communications switch, or optical-electrical equipment)), a processor as a common and commercially available electronic component (Paragraph 0205-- a processor or microprocessor can be substituted for any “control circuit,” which may refer to, for example, hardwired circuitry, programmable circuitry (e.g., a computer processor including one or more individual instruction processing cores, processing unit, processor, microcontroller, microcontroller unit, controller, digital signal processor (DSP), programmable logic device (PLD), programmable logic array (PLA), or field programmable gate array (FPGA)), state machine circuitry, firmware that stores instructions executed by programmable circuitry, and any combination thereof), and a display device as a known element of a computing device or similar electronic device (Paragraph 0119, 0205, 0208-- “displaying,” or the like, refer to the action and processes of a computer system, or similar electronic computing device, that manipulates and transforms data represented as physical (electronic) quantities within the computer system's registers and memories into other data similarly represented as physical quantities within the computer system memories or registers or other such information storage, transmission or display devices). Carbo additionally demonstrates that a leg worn device including sensors may be seen to be well-understood, routine, or conventional (Paragraph 0045-- a wearable article (e.g., sleeves, braces, etc.)… the flexible circuits can be used to calibrate conventional sensors (e.g., IMUs, etc.)). The finding of these additional elements as well-understood, routine, or conventional is further supported by their presence in the form of common electronic elements in Seo (US 20200085666 A1; paragraph 0003—motion assistance apparatuses are known in the art, paragraph 0064—IMU, paragraph 0078—communicator may include an internal bus and an external bus, paragraph 0079—processing device may include a microprocessor, central processing unit…, paragraph 0133—display may be implemented by a touch screen, a liquid crystal display…). As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the present elements amount to no more than mere indications to apply the exception.
In Summary, claim 14 recites abstract idea without being integrated into a practical application, and does not provide additional elements that would amount to significantly more. As such, taken as a whole, the claim and is ineligible under the 35 U.S.C. 101.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 14, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang (US 20190083002 A1) in view of Jain (WO 2019175899 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Jang discloses an electronic device (Apparatus 600), comprising:
a communication module (Communicator 610), comprising communication circuitry, configured to receive sensor data from a wearable device (Paragraph 0115-0116-- The communicator 610 is connected to the processor 620 and the memory 630 to transmit and/or receive data);
at least one processor (Processor 620) comprising processing circuitry, configured individually and/or collectively to calculate physical ability information of a user based on the sensor data (Paragraph 0117-0121, 0127-- The processor 620 processes data received by the communicator 610 and data stored in the memory 630. The processor 620 executes a computer-readable code, for example, software, stored in the memory 630 and instructions caused by the processor 620…); and
a display module, comprising a display, configured to output the physical ability information (Paragraph 0143-- The user interface may include a button, a touch screen, and a microphone for voice recognition),
wherein the at least one processor is further configured individually and/or collectively, to:
calculate a temporal gait index based on first sensor data including motion information (IMU 130) of the user received from the wearable device (Paragraph 0127-0128, 0131, 0140-0141-- the processor 620 may generate additional state information using the received measurement values, for example, a step duration, a swing time, a support time… state information associated with the motion may include X axis, Y axis, and Z axis accelerations and X axis, Y axis, and Z axis angular velocities according to a walking motion of the user measured by the IMU 130 of the walking assistance device 100… The processor 620 may detect the event that the lead leg is in contact with the ground based on a direction and a magnitude of an acceleration measured by the IMU 130…; paragraph 0152-0162-- The points in times 840, 842, 844, and 846 each at which the lead leg is in contact with the ground may be detected based on at least one of measurement values of the IMU 130 and the pressure sensor…);
calculate a spatial gait index based on second sensor data regarding a hip joint angle (Sensor 120) of the user received from the wearable device (Paragraph 0125-- the state information associated with the motion may include a change trajectory of a hip joint angle…A joint angle may be measured using the sensor 120 described above with FIGS. 1 and 2. The sensor 120 may measure the joint angle in real time and the communicator 610 may receive the measured joint angle in real time; Paragraph 0127-0131, 0137-0138-- the processor 620 may generate additional state information using the received measurement values, for example…a step length, and the like; paragraph 0153-0163-- A hip joint angle trajectory 800 may be used as state information associated with a motion of the walking assistance device 100…); and
calculate the physical ability information based on the temporal gait index and the spatial gait index (Paragraph 0018-0019, 0036--the reward value includes one or more of a gait symmetry of state information associated with the motion, a power consumption amount of state information associated with the motion, a gait stability of state information associated with the motion, metabolic cost, and external feedback; Paragraph 0134-0141-- a gait symmetry between the left leg and the right leg may be calculated as the reward value… In an example in which VL denotes a step length of the left leg and VR denotes a step length of the right leg in Equation 1, the step length of the left leg and the step length of the right leg may be calculated based on state information associated with the motion of the walking assistance device 100… Although example embodiments of calculating the gait symmetry using the step duration and the step length are described using Equation 1, the gait symmetry may be calculated using a factor, such as a swing time and a stance time…);
wherein the second sensor data comprises information on the hip joint angle of the user measured by an angle sensor of the wearable device during a walking process of the user performed from a start point to an end point (Paragraph 0125-- the state information associated with the motion may include a change trajectory of a hip joint angle…A joint angle may be measured using the sensor 120 described above with FIGS. 1 and 2. The sensor 120 may measure the joint angle in real time and the communicator 610 may receive the measured joint angle in real time; Paragraph 0127-0131, 0137-0138-- the processor 620 may generate additional state information using the received measurement values, for example…a step length, and the like; paragraph 0153-0163-- A hip joint angle trajectory 800 may be used as state information associated with a motion of the walking assistance device 100…).
However, Jang does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one processor is further configured individually and/or collectively, to: recognize that the user ends walking based on the received sensor data, and when it is recognized that the user ends walking, complete a collection of sensor data for measuring a walking ability of the user; determine information on the walking ability of the user based on sensor data obtained up to a point in time at which an end of the walking is recognized.
Jain, in the same field of endeavor of a wearable device for gait analysis based on motion parameters and hip joint angles, discloses a system including at least one processor configured individually and/or collectively, to: recognize that the user ends walking based on the received sensor data, and when it is recognized that the user ends walking, complete a collection of sensor data for measuring a walking ability of the user; determine information on the walking ability of the user based on sensor data obtained up to a point in time at which an end of the walking is recognized (Page 41, lines 1-7 and Page 44, line 9-31--The data from the modules are sent to the computing unit once a gait cycle starts. These data are stored in local storage of the computing unit. The stored local data is uploaded on a cloud server once the gait cycle is completed. The cloud server sends the report back to the computing unit for display and evaluation.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the device of Jang to include the walking recognition and data collection of Jain in order to predictably improve the device by reducing a processing load and power consumption by reducing the collection of unnecessary data and only performing data collection during a period of interest such as during a gait cycle.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Jang and Jain discloses the electronic device of claim 1. Jang additionally discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured, individually and/or collectively, to calculate the temporal gait index based on first feature points corresponding to a heel strike and second feature points corresponding to a toe-off from a motion value of the user measured by an inertial sensor of the wearable device (Paragraph 0127-0128, 0131, 0140-0141-- The processor 620 may detect the event that the lead leg is in contact with the ground based on a direction and a magnitude of an acceleration measured by the IMU 130…; paragraph 0152-0162-- The points in times 840, 842, 844, and 846 each at which the lead leg is in contact with the ground may be detected based on at least one of measurement values of the IMU 130 and the pressure sensor…; Fig. 8-9; IMU 130).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Jang and Jain discloses the electronic device of claim 2. Jang additionally discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured, individually and/or collectively, to calculate the temporal gait index based on a time interval between first feature points temporally adjacent to each other among the first feature points, a time interval between second feature points temporally adjacent to each other among the second feature points, and a time interval between a first feature point and a second feature point temporally adjacent to the first feature point (Paragraph 0127, 0138, 0156-- the processor 620 may generate additional state information using the received measurement values, for example, a step duration, a swing time, a support time, a step length, and the like…The points in times 840, 842, 844, and 846 each at which the lead leg is in contact with the ground may be detected based on at least one of measurement values of the IMU 130 and the pressure sensor; Figs. 8-9—time between first feature points temporally adjacent to each other among the first feature points may be a gait cycle, time between second feature points temporally adjacent to each other among second feature points may be a gait cycle for the opposite leg, and time interval between a first feature point and a second feature point temporally adjacent to the first feature point may correspond to a step).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Jang and Jain discloses the electronic device of claim 1. Jang additionally discloses wherein the temporal gait index comprises at least one of: a step time, a swing time, a stance time, a stride time, or a double support time of the user (Paragraph 0127-0128, 0131, 0140-0141-- the processor 620 may generate additional state information using the received measurement values, for example, a step duration, a swing time, a support time…; paragraph 0152-0162-- The points in times 840, 842, 844, and 846 each at which the lead leg is in contact with the ground may be detected based on at least one of measurement values of the IMU 130 and the pressure sensor…).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Jang and Jain discloses the electronic device of claim 1. Jang additionally discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured, individually and/or collectively, to calculate the spatial gait index based on a hip joint angle value at a point in time corresponding to a heel strike from the hip joint angle value of the user measured by an angle sensor of the wearable device (Paragraph 0125-- the state information associated with the motion may include a change trajectory of a hip joint angle…; Paragraph 0127-0131, 0137-0138-- the processor 620 may generate additional state information using the received measurement values, for example…a step length, and the like; paragraph 0153-0163-- A hip joint angle trajectory 800 may be used as state information associated with a motion of the walking assistance device 100… Points in times 830, 832, 834, and 836 each at which a hip joint angle of a lead leg is maximum may be detected from the right hip joint angle trajectory 810 and the left hip joint angle trajectory 820… Points in times 840, 842, 844, and 846 each at which the lead leg is in contact with the ground may be detected from the right hip joint angle trajectory 810 and the left hip joint angle trajectory 820…; sensor 120).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Jang and Jain discloses the electronic device of claim 1. Jang additionally discloses wherein the spatial gait index comprises at least one of: a step length, a stride length, or a leg length of the user (Paragraph 0127-0131, 0137-0138-- the processor 620 may generate additional state information using the received measurement values, for example…a step length, and the like).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Jang and Jain discloses the electronic device of claim 1. Jang additionally discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured, individually and/or collectively, to calculate at least one of a gait speed, a gait fluctuation index, or a gait symmetry index of the user, based on the temporal gait index and the spatial gait index (Paragraph 0018-0019, 0036--the reward value includes one or more of a gait symmetry of state information associated with the motion, a power consumption amount of state information associated with the motion, a gait stability of state information associated with the motion, metabolic cost, and external feedback; Paragraph 0134-0141-- a gait symmetry between the left leg and the right leg may be calculated as the reward value… In an example in which VL denotes a step length of the left leg and VR denotes a step length of the right leg in Equation 1, the step length of the left leg and the step length of the right leg may be calculated based on state information associated with the motion of the walking assistance device 100… Although example embodiments of calculating the gait symmetry using the step duration and the step length are described using Equation 1, the gait symmetry may be calculated using a factor, such as a swing time and a stance time…).
Regarding claim 14, Jang discloses a wearable device (walking assistance device 100), comprising:
a leg support frame configured to support a leg of a user when the wearable device is worn on the leg of the user (Fig. 1; paragraph 0069-0071-- The walking assistance device 100 may be a wearable device… Example embodiments described herein may be applied to a hip type and also be applied to any type of devices that assist walking of the user);
a sensor module, comprising at least one sensor (Sensor 120 and IMU 130), configured to obtain sensor data including motion information of the user in a physical ability measurement mode (Paragraph 0075-0077-- The sensor 120 may measure an angle of the hip joint of the user during walking… The IMU 130 may measure acceleration information and posture information during walking…);
a communication module, comprising communication circuitry (Controller 140, communicator 310; paragraph 0081, 0086—the controller 140 may include a communicator, a processor, and a memory), configured to transmit the sensor data to an electronic device (gait policy updating apparatus 600) and receive at least a control signal from the electronic device (Paragraph 0080-0082, 0086-0090-- The communicator 310 is connected to the processor 320 and the memory 330 to transmit and/or receive data. The communicator 310 may be connected to an external device to transmit and receive data…); and
at least one processor comprising processing circuitry (Controller 140, Processor 320; paragraph 0081, 0086—the controller 140 may include a communicator, a processor, and a memory) configured, individually and/or collectively, to control the communication module and the sensor module (Paragraph 0080-0082, 0086-0094-- The processor 320 processes data received by the communicator 310 and data stored in the memory 330. The processor 320 may be a data processing device configured as hardware having a circuit with a physical structure for executing desired operations…),
wherein the sensor module is configured to obtain first sensor data including motion information of the user to be measured by an inertial sensor (IMU 130; Paragraph 0075-0077-- The IMU 130 may measure acceleration information and posture information during walking…) and second sensor data including a hip joint angle of the user to be measured by an angle sensor (Sensor 120; Paragraph 0075-0077-- The sensor 120 may measure an angle of the hip joint of the user during walking…), and
wherein the at least one processor is further configured, individually and/or collectively, to control the communication module to transmit the first sensor data and the second sensor data to the electronic device in the physical ability measurement mode (Paragraph 0080-0082, 0086-0090--The communicator 310 is connected to the processor 320 and the memory 330 to transmit and/or receive data. The communicator 310 may be connected to an external device to transmit and receive data; paragraph 0125-- the communicator 610 may receive measurement values from at least one sensor of the walking assistance device 100 as state information associated with the motion of the walking assistance device 100) so that the electronic device can
calculate a temporal gait index based on the first sensor data (Paragraph 0127-0128, 0131, 0140-0141-- the processor 620 may generate additional state information using the received measurement values, for example, a step duration, a swing time, a support time… state information associated with the motion may include X axis, Y axis, and Z axis accelerations and X axis, Y axis, and Z axis angular velocities according to a walking motion of the user measured by the IMU 130 of the walking assistance device 100… The processor 620 may detect the event that the lead leg is in contact with the ground based on a direction and a magnitude of an acceleration measured by the IMU 130…; paragraph 0152-0162-- The points in times 840, 842, 844, and 846 each at which the lead leg is in contact with the ground may be detected based on at least one of measurement values of the IMU 130 and the pressure sensor…),
calculate a spatial gait index based on the second sensor data (Paragraph 0125-- the state information associated with the motion may include a change trajectory of a hip joint angle…A joint angle may be measured using the sensor 120 described above with FIGS. 1 and 2. The sensor 120 may measure the joint angle in real time and the communicator 610 may receive the measured joint angle in real time; Paragraph 0127-0131, 0137-0138-- the processor 620 may generate additional state information using the received measurement values, for example…a step length, and the like; paragraph 0153-0163-- A hip joint angle trajectory 800 may be used as state information associated with a motion of the walking assistance device 100…), and
calculate physical ability information based on the temporal gait index and the spatial gait index (Paragraph 0018-0019, 0036--the reward value includes one or more of a gait symmetry of state information associated with the motion, a power consumption amount of state information associated with the motion, a gait stability of state information associated with the motion, metabolic cost, and external feedback; Paragraph 0134-0141-- a gait symmetry between the left leg and the right leg may be calculated as the reward value… In an example in which VL denotes a step length of the left leg and VR denotes a step length of the right leg in Equation 1, the step length of the left leg and the step length of the right leg may be calculated based on state information associated with the motion of the walking assistance device 100… Although example embodiments of calculating the gait symmetry using the step duration and the step length are described using Equation 1, the gait symmetry may be calculated using a factor, such as a swing time and a stance time…).
It is noted that regarding “in a physical ability measurement mode”, the wearable device of Jang is utilized to determine a physical measurement ability such that the operating mode is a physical ability measurement mode.
However, Jang does not explicitly disclose when the control signal, for a measurement of a target physical ability of the user, is received from the electronic device: to activate the physical ability measurement mode in response to the control signal; and to control the sensor module to obtain the sensor data in the physical ability measurement mode; to initialize the sensor data when the physical ability measurement mode is activated, and to control a recording of the sensor data to be started when a predetermined period of time for measuring the target physical ability elapses.
Jain, in the same field of endeavor of a wearable device for gait analysis based on motion parameters and hip joint angles, discloses a system wherein a control signal, for a measurement of a target physical ability of the user, is received from the electronic device: to activate the physical ability measurement mode in response to the control signal; and to control the sensor module to obtain the sensor data in the physical ability measurement mode; to initialize the sensor data when the physical ability measurement mode is activated, and to control a recording of the sensor data to be started when a predetermined period of time for measuring the target physical ability elapses (Page 41, lines 1-7 and Page 44, line 9-31--The data from the modules are sent to the computing unit once a gait cycle starts. These data are stored in local storage of the computing unit. The stored local data is uploaded on a cloud server once the gait cycle is completed. The cloud server sends the report back to the computing unit for display and evaluation… As the switch is turned on, the state machine starts with making transition from off state to on state. If there is a fuse fault, the device returns to the off state to avoid the damage to the electronic component and battery. After on state, the device transition to the initialization state where the device first initialises all the hardware microcontroller or microprocessor or field- programmable gate array (FPGA) in each of the embedded brace(s) and /shoe or sock, where the sensor are assigned the predefined buses and sensors and the peripheral are configured to their default setting…).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the device of Jang to include the control signal teachings of Jain in order to predictably improve the device by reducing a processing load and power consumption by reducing the collection of unnecessary data and only performing data collection during a period of interest such as during a gait cycle.
Regarding claim 18, Jang discloses a method of operating an electronic device (Apparatus 600), the method comprising: receiving (Paragraph 0080-0082, 0086-0090, 0115-0116-- The communicator 610 is connected to the processor 620 and the memory 630 to transmit and/or receive data; paragraph 0125-- the communicator 610 may receive measurement values from at least one sensor of the walking assistance device 100 as state information associated with the motion of the walking assistance device 100) first sensor data including motion information of the user and second sensor data including a hip joint angle of the user from the wearable device (Paragraph 0075-0077-- The sensor 120 may measure an angle of the hip joint of the user during walking… The IMU 130 may measure acceleration information and posture information during walking…);
calculating physical ability information regarding the target physical ability of the user based on the first sensor data and the second sensor data (Paragraph 0134-0141-- a gait symmetry between the left leg and the right leg may be calculated as the reward value… In an example in which VL denotes a step length of the left leg and VR denotes a step length of the right leg in Equation 1, the step length of the left leg and the step length of the right leg may be calculated based on state information associated with the motion of the walking assistance device 100… Although example embodiments of calculating the gait symmetry using the step duration and the step length are described using Equation 1, the gait symmetry may be calculated using a factor, such as a swing time and a stance time…);
wherein the calculating of the physical ability information comprises
calculating a temporal gait index based on the first sensor data (Paragraph 0127-0128, 0131, 0140-0141-- the processor 620 may generate additional state information using the received measurement values, for example, a step duration, a swing time, a support time… state information associated with the motion may include X axis, Y axis, and Z axis accelerations and X axis, Y axis, and Z axis angular velocities according to a walking motion of the user measured by the IMU 130 of the walking assistance device 100… The processor 620 may detect the event that the lead leg is in contact with the ground based on a direction and a magnitude of an acceleration measured by the IMU 130…; paragraph 0152-0162-- The points in times 840, 842, 844, and 846 each at which the lead leg is in contact with the ground may be detected based on at least one of measurement values of the IMU 130 and the pressure sensor…),
calculating a spatial gait index based on the second sensor data (Paragraph 0125-- the state information associated with the motion may include a change trajectory of a hip joint angle…A joint angle may be measured using the sensor 120 described above with FIGS. 1 and 2. The sensor 120 may measure the joint angle in real time and the communicator 610 may receive the measured joint angle in real time; Paragraph 0127-0131, 0137-0138-- the processor 620 may generate additional state information using the received measurement values, for example…a step length, and the like; paragraph 0153-0163-- A hip joint angle trajectory 800 may be used as state information associated with a motion of the walking assistance device 100…), and
calculating the physical ability information based on the temporal gait index and the spatial gait index (Paragraph 0018-0019, 0036--the reward value includes one or more of a gait symmetry of state information associated with the motion, a power consumption amount of state information associated with the motion, a gait stability of state information associated with the motion, metabolic cost, and external feedback; Paragraph 0134-0141-- a gait symmetry between the left leg and the right leg may be calculated as the reward value… In an example in which VL denotes a step length of the left leg and VR denotes a step length of the right leg in Equation 1, the step length of the left leg and the step length of the right leg may be calculated based on state information associated with the motion of the walking assistance device 100… Although example embodiments of calculating the gait symmetry using the step duration and the step length are described using Equation 1, the gait symmetry may be calculated using a factor, such as a swing time and a stance time…).
However, Jang does not explicitly disclose receiving a user input for a measurement of a target physical ability of a user; transmitting a control signal for the measurement of the target physical ability to a wearable device, in response to the user input;; the at least one processor is further configured individually and/or collectively, to: recognize that the user ends walking based on the received sensor data, and when it is recognized that the user ends walking, complete a collection of sensor data for measuring a walking ability of the user; determine information on the walking ability of the user based on sensor data obtained up to a point in time at which an end of the walking is recognized; and providing the physical ability information to the user.
Jain, in the same field of endeavor of a wearable device for gait analysis based on motion parameters and hip joint angles, discloses a system including receiving a user input for a measurement of a target physical ability of a user (the user initiates the test from the computing device (1)); transmitting a control signal for the measurement of the target physical ability to a wearable device, in response to the user input (Page 41, lines 1-7 and Page 44, line 9-31-- The modules are pre-paired to the computing unit and connect automatically once software is started on the computing unit. The data from the modules are sent to the computing unit once a gait cycle starts…); the at least one processor is further configured individually and/or collectively, to: recognize that the user ends walking based on the received sensor data, and when it is recognized that the user ends walking, complete a collection of sensor data for measuring a walking ability of the user (Page 41, lines 1-7 and Page 44, line 9-31--The data from the modules are sent to the computing unit once a gait cycle starts. These data are stored in local storage of the computing unit. The stored local data is uploaded on a cloud server once the gait cycle is completed…); determine information on the walking ability of the user based on sensor data obtained up to a point in time at which an end of the walking is recognized (Page 41, lines 1-7 and Page 44, line 9-31--The data from the modules are sent to the computing unit once a gait cycle starts…data is uploaded on a cloud server once the gait cycle is completed…; Page 43, line 20-31-- gait report is generated on the software and uploaded on the cloud platform for data analysis… helping to understand the walking deformities and improving it while walking… the present wearable shoe-based device correlates the tracked data points to feed an algorithm that serves as a tool for assessing and determining the efficacy of treatment via pre and post gait analysis); and providing the physical ability information to the user (Page 41, lines 1-7, Page 43, line 20-31, and Page 44, line 9-31-- The cloud server sends the report back to the computing unit for display and evaluation.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the device of Jang to include the walking recognition and data collection of Jain in order to predictably improve the device by reducing a processing load and power consumption by reducing the collection of unnecessary data and only performing data collection during a period of interest such as during a gait cycle.
Claim(s) 8-10 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang in view of Jain, further in view of Bian (US 20210049353 A1).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Jang and Jain discloses the electronic device of claim 1. Jang generally discloses the device includes a display module (Paragraph 0143, 0169—user interface may include…a touchscreen). However, Jang does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one processor is configured to provide a user interface to guide a measurement of a target physical ability of the user to the user, via the display module .
Bian, in the same field of endeavor of assessing physical function based on measurements of hip angle (Paragraph 0163, 0185, 0192) and temporal motion parameters (Paragraph 0019, 0105, 0185), discloses a device (Device 130; paragraph 0088) wherein at least one processor is configured to provide a user interface to guide a measurement of a target physical ability of the user to the user (Fig. 4; paragraph 0102-- a pre-test instruction interface 400 that lists instructions 410 that a user of the device 130 should pay attention to during the test. The instructions include, but are not limited to, phone setup, system operations, and reminders to testers), via a display module (Display 136; paragraph 0088, 0091).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the device of Jang to include the guiding interface of Bian in order to predictably improve the ease of use of the device and the accuracy of any calculations performed by the device by providing a user with guidance for obtaining accurate measurements.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Jang, Jain and Bian discloses the electronic device of claim 8. Jang additionally discloses the electronic device may be used to determine various different target physical abilities (Paragraph 0018-0019, 0036--the reward value includes one or more of a gait symmetry of state information associated with the motion, a power consumption amount of state information associated with the motion, a gait stability of state information associated with the motion, metabolic cost, and external feedback; Paragraph 0134-0141-- a gait symmetry between the left leg and the right leg may be calculated as the reward value… In an example in which VL denotes a step length of the left leg and VR denotes a step length of the right leg in Equation 1, the step length of the left leg and the step length of the right leg may be calculated based on state information associated with the motion of the walking assistance device 100… Although example embodiments of calculating the gait symmetry using the step duration and the step length are described using Equation 1, the gait symmetry may be calculated using a factor, such as a swing time and a stance time…), to transmit between the communication module and the wearable device (Paragraph 0080-0082, 0086-0090-- The communicator 310 is connected to the processor 320 and the memory 330 to transmit and/or receive data. The communicator 310 may be connected to an external device to transmit and receive data…), and to receive user input (Paragraph 0143, 0169).
However, Jang fails to explicitly disclose wherein the at least one processor is configured to, based on a user input for the measurement of the target physical ability of the user being received, control the communication module to transmit a control signal for the measurement of the target physical ability to the wearable device in response to the user input.
Jain, in the same field of endeavor of a wearable device for gait analysis based on motion parameters and hip joint angles, discloses a system wherein the at least one processor is configured to, based on a user input for the measurement of the target physical ability of the user being received, control the communication module to transmit a control signal for the measurement of the target physical ability to the wearable device in response to the user input (Page 41, lines 1-7 and Page 44, line 9-31-- The modules are pre-paired to the computing unit and connect automatically once software is started on the computing unit. The data from the modules are sent to the computing unit once a gait cycle starts…the user initiates the test from the computing device (1)… At this point the microcontroller sends a signal to the GSTU to start the timers and the sensors peripherals and to acquire the data).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the device of Jang to include the walking recognition and data collection of Jain in order to predictably improve the device by reducing a processing load and power consumption by reducing the collection of unnecessary data and only performing data collection during a period of interest such as during a gait cycle.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Jang, Jain and Bian discloses the electronic device of claim 9 (see interpretation in light of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), above). Jang additionally discloses the electronic device may be used to determine various different target physical abilities (Paragraph 0018-0019, 0036--the reward value includes one or more of a gait symmetry of state information associated with the motion, a power consumption amount of state information associated with the motion, a gait stability of state information associated with the motion, metabolic cost, and external feedback; Paragraph 0134-0141-- a gait symmetry between the left leg and the right leg may be calculated as the reward value… In an example in which VL denotes a step length of the left leg and VR denotes a step length of the right leg in Equation 1, the step length of the left leg and the step length of the right leg may be calculated based on state information associated with the motion of the walking assistance device 100… Although example embodiments of calculating the gait symmetry using the step duration and the step length are described using Equation 1, the gait symmetry may be calculated using a factor, such as a swing time and a stance time…).
However, Jang fails to explicitly disclose wherein the wearable device is configured to: when the control signal for the measurement of the target physical ability is received from the electronic device, activate a physical ability measurement mode; and obtain the sensor data including the motion information of the user in the physical ability measurement mode.
Jain, in the same field of endeavor of a wearable device for gait analysis based on motion parameters and hip joint angles, discloses a system wherein the wearable device is configured to: when the control signal for the measurement of the target physical ability is received from the electronic device, activate a physical ability measurement mode; and obtain the sensor data including the motion information of the user in the physical ability measurement mode (Page 41, lines 1-7 and Page 44, line 9-31-- the data from all the embedded devices and/or braces of left and right leg are sent to a receiver station or a system or an external computing unit. The modules are connected via wireless technology to computing unit. The computing unit is in an access point mode (AP mode). The modules are pre-paired to the computing unit and connect automatically once software is started on the computing unit. The data from the modules are sent to the computing unit once a gait cycle starts…the user initiates the test from the computing device (1)… At this point the microcontroller sends a signal to the GSTU to start the timers and the sensors peripherals and to acquire the data).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the device of Jang to include the walking recognition and data collection of Jain in order to predictably improve the device by reducing a processing load and power consumption by reducing the collection of unnecessary data and only performing data collection during a period of interest such as during a gait cycle.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Jang and Jain discloses the electronic device of claim 1. Jang additionally discloses the at least one processor is configured to: when a hip joint angle value measured for one time interval is greater than or equal to a first threshold, determine that a leg of the user moves (see Fig. 7-9 and 15, detecting preset events during gait cycle based on hip joint angle); and calculate the physical ability information of the user based on a posture of the user, an upper body motion value measured during the one time interval, and a time at which it is determined that the leg moves (Paragraph 0018-0019, 0036--the reward value includes one or more of a gait symmetry of state information associated with the motion, a power consumption amount of state information associated with the motion, a gait stability of state information associated with the motion, metabolic cost, and external feedback; Paragraph 0134-0141-- a gait symmetry between the left leg and the right leg may be calculated as the reward value… In an example in which VL denotes a step length of the left leg and VR denotes a step length of the right leg in Equation 1, the step length of the left leg and the step length of the right leg may be calculated based on state information associated with the motion of the walking assistance device 100… Although example embodiments of calculating the gait symmetry using the step duration and the step length are described using Equation 1, the gait symmetry may be calculated using a factor, such as a swing time and a stance time…). It is noted that the hip angle of the user may correspond to a posture of the user and the position of the IMU 130 at the lower back (see Fig. 1) demonstrates that the IMU motion data (Paragraph 0077) may thus correspond to an upper body motion value.
However, Jang fails to disclose the at least one processor is configured to, when a physical ability measurement mode for measuring a target physical ability is a short physical performance battery (SPPB) test.
Bian, in the same field of endeavor of assessing physical function based on measurements of hip angle (Paragraph 0163, 0185, 0192) and temporal motion parameters (Paragraph 0019, 0105, 0185), discloses at least one processor is configured to, when a physical ability measurement mode for measuring a target physical ability is a short physical performance battery (SPPB) test (Fig. 3, Paragraph 0101, 0183-- the device 130 uses internationally recognized standardized physical function assessment tests with standardized test results. Such tests include, but are not limited to… the short physical performance battery protocol).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the device of Jang to additionally monitor a user’s perform in a SPPB test as disclosed by Bian in order to improve the device by enabling the monitoring of an additional physical ability which may allow for the determination of risks to the user such as a risk of fall or disability (see Bian, paragraph 0183) and by utilizing the device to monitor the performance of a physical test which is known in the art and standardized (see Bian, paragraph 0183—internationally recognized standardized physical function assessment tests) and would thus allow for comparisons between users to monitor weaknesses or progress in a training or rehabilitation scheme.
Claim(s) 11 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang in view of Jain, further in view of Bian, further in view of Atrsaei (“Postural transitions detection…”).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Jang and Jain discloses the electronic device of claim 1. Jang additionally discloses measuring a hip joint angle value and monitoring this value over time to determine events in a user’s motion (see Fig. 7-9 and 15, detecting preset events during gait cycle based on hip joint angle) in order to determine a target physical ability of a user (Paragraph 0018-0019, 0036--the reward value includes one or more of a gait symmetry of state information associated with the motion, a power consumption amount of state information associated with the motion, a gait stability of state information associated with the motion, metabolic cost, and external feedback; Paragraph 0134-0141-- a gait symmetry between the left leg and the right leg may be calculated as the reward value… In an example in which VL denotes a step length of the left leg and VR denotes a step length of the right leg in Equation 1, the step length of the left leg and the step length of the right leg may be calculated based on state information associated with the motion of the walking assistance device 100… Although example embodiments of calculating the gait symmetry using the step duration and the step length are described using Equation 1, the gait symmetry may be calculated using a factor, such as a swing time and a stance time…).
However, Jang fails to disclose the at least one processor is configured individually and/or collectively to, when a physical ability measurement mode for measuring a target physical ability is a timed up and go (TUG) test, determine that the user rises from a chair; determine that the user sits in the chair; extracting a point corresponding to completion of the TUG test during a predefined period, and estimate the physical ability information of the user based on a period of time from a start of the TUG test until an end of the TUG test.
Bian, in the same field of endeavor of assessing physical function based on measurements of hip angle (Paragraph 0163, 0185, 0192) and temporal motion parameters (Paragraph 0019, 0105, 0185), discloses at least one processor is configured to, when a physical ability measurement mode for measuring a target physical ability is a timed up and go (TUG) test (Paragraph 0183, 0187-- Such tests include, but are not limited to, at least one of the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test), determine that the user rises from a chair (Paragraph 0184, 0187--in at least one embodiment described in accordance with the teachings herein, the device 130, through posture and gait recognition, automatically identifies the start, segment, and end times of various tests, and then calculates the test segment and total completion time…The device 130 iterates over each element of the entire array and looks for a change of pose prediction between a current value and the next value in the array. The first index location (e.g., first frame) of the first change of posture from sitting to standing up is recorded); determine that the user sits in the chair (Paragraph 0187--in at least one embodiment described in accordance with the teachings herein, the device 130, through posture and gait recognition, automatically identifies the start, segment, and end times of various tests, and then calculates the test segment and total completion time…The analysis continues using subsequent images, and the second index location (e.g., second frame) of the second change of posture from standing to sitting down is recorded); extracting a point corresponding to completion of the TUG test during a predefined period (Paragraph 0184, 0187-- in at least one embodiment described in accordance with the teachings herein, the device 130, through posture and gait recognition, automatically identifies the start, segment, and end times of various tests, and then calculates the test segment and total completion time), and estimate the physical ability information of the user based on a period of time from a start of the TUG test until an end of the TUG test (Paragraph 0183-0184, 0187-- the TUG test uses the total time to complete the test as an indicator to assess physical function… the device 130 finds the frame difference (i.e., number of frames) between the first and second frames by subtracting the two values for the first and second indices and stores this variable in memory. This frame difference is then projected into differences in seconds by multiplying it with a Seconds Per Frame (SPF) variable that can be obtained by dividing the total number of frames by the total duration of the video clip. The completion time can be obtained by multiplying the frame difference by the SPF).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the device of Jang to additionally monitor a user’s perform in a TUG test as disclosed by Bian in order to improve the device by enabling the monitoring of an additional physical ability which may allow for the determination of risks to the user such as a risk of fall or disability (see Bian, paragraph 0183--If an elderly subject needs more than 12 seconds to complete the test, he or she is considered to be at risk of falling) and by utilizing the device to monitor the performance of a physical test which is known in the art and standardized (see Bian, paragraph 0183—internationally recognized standardized physical function assessment tests) and would thus allow for comparisons between users to monitor weaknesses or progress in a training or rehabilitation scheme.
However, the combination of Jang and Bian fails to explicitly disclose when a hip joint angle value included in the sensor data is greater than or equal to a first threshold, determine that the user rises from a chair; when the hip joint angle value is less than or equal to a second threshold, determine that the user sits in the chair; extract, as a feature point, a hip joint angle value corresponding to a minimum value among hip joint angle values measured during a predefine period of time that elapses from a point in time at which it is determined that the user sits in the chair; and estimate the physical ability information of the user based on a period of time from a start of the TUG test until the hip joint angle value corresponding to the minimum value is extracted.
Atrsaei, in the same field of endeavor of monitoring user posture and motions using angle measurements (Abstract), discloses when a hip joint angle value included in the sensor data is greater than or equal to a first threshold, determine that the user rises from a chair; when the hip joint angle value is less than or equal to a second threshold, determine that the user sits in the chair (see Fig. 7). In particular, Fig. 7 demonstrates that with all sensor placement options the hip joint angle value rises to a maximum from ~0 degrees as the user stands such that the user may be determined as rising from a chair when the hip joint angle is greater than a first threshold near zero during the predefined period of time. Fig. 7 additionally demonstrates that with all sensor options, the hip joint angle value decreases after the maximum hip joint angle is reached, indicating that the user sits in the chair, such that it may be determined that the user sits in the chair when the hip joint angle value is less than or equal to a second threshold which is less than the maximum angle during the predefined period of time, and where the user is sitting during the time period having the minimum hip joint angle.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the device of the combined Jang and Bian, wherein Jang discloses monitoring hip joint angles of a user to detect various motion events and wherein Bian discloses performing a TUG test and automatically detecting that a user rises from a chair and sits in a chair to determine a TUG test length, with Atrsaei, which discloses that a hip joint angle greater than or equal to a first threshold corresponds to a user rising from a chair and a hip joint angle value less than or equal to a second threshold corresponds to a user sitting in the chair, in order to extract, as a feature point, a hip joint angle value corresponding to a minimum value among hip joint angle values measured during a predefine period of time that elapses from a point in time at which it is determined that the user sits in the chair in place of the extracted “end point” of Bian; and estimate the physical ability information of the user based on a period of time from a start of the TUG test until the hip joint angle value corresponding to the minimum value is extracted in place of the determined test length of Bian, in order to predictably improve the device by providing a method of determining sit-to-stand and stand-to-sit transitions of a user automatically and objectively using measurements of hip joint angle which would provide increased accuracy compared to a manual or image-based determination by having a consistent threshold to be used to mark each transition which cannot be obscured by clothing, poor lighting, or other environmental conditions.
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Jang and Jain discloses the electronic device of claim 1. Jang additionally discloses measuring a hip joint angle value and monitoring this value over time to determine events in a user’s motion such that the hip joint angle being compared to different thresholds may indicate different events in the user’s motion (see Fig. 7-9 and 15, detecting preset events during gait cycle based on hip joint angle) in order to determine a target physical ability of a user (Paragraph 0018-0019, 0036--the reward value includes one or more of a gait symmetry of state information associated with the motion, a power consumption amount of state information associated with the motion, a gait stability of state information associated with the motion, metabolic cost, and external feedback; Paragraph 0134-0141-- a gait symmetry between the left leg and the right leg may be calculated as the reward value… In an example in which VL denotes a step length of the left leg and VR denotes a step length of the right leg in Equation 1, the step length of the left leg and the step length of the right leg may be calculated based on state information associated with the motion of the walking assistance device 100… Although example embodiments of calculating the gait symmetry using the step duration and the step length are described using Equation 1, the gait symmetry may be calculated using a factor, such as a swing time and a stance time…).
However, Jang fails to disclose the at least one processor is configured to, when a physical ability measurement mode for measuring a target physical ability is a sit to stand test, determine that the user rises from a chair and increase a number of times the user rises from the chair; determine that the user sits in the chair; when the number of times the user rises from the chair reaches a reference number of times, extract a hip joint angle value corresponding to a maximum value appearing immediately before the number of times the user rises from the chair reaches the reference number of times, as a feature point, and to calculate physical ability information of the user based on a period of time from a start of the test until the hip joint angle value corresponding to the maximum value is extracted.
Bian, in the same field of endeavor of assessing physical function based on measurements of hip angle (Paragraph 0163, 0185, 0192) and temporal motion parameters (Paragraph 0019, 0105, 0185), discloses at least one processor is configured to, when a physical ability measurement mode for measuring a target physical ability is a sit to stand test including a reference number of times that a user rises from a chair (Paragraph 0105, 0183, 0187-- Such tests include, but are not limited to, at least one of … the 5 Times Sit to Stand test (STS)), determine that the user rises from a chair and increase a number of times the user rises from the chair (Paragraph 0184, 0187--in at least one embodiment described in accordance with the teachings herein, the device 130, through posture and gait recognition, automatically identifies the start, segment, and end times of various tests, and then calculates the test segment and total completion time…The device 130 iterates over each element of the entire array and looks for a change of pose prediction between a current value and the next value in the array. The first index location (e.g., first frame) of the first change of posture from sitting to standing up is recorded); determine that the user sits in the chair (Paragraph 0187--in at least one embodiment described in accordance with the teachings herein, the device 130, through posture and gait recognition, automatically identifies the start, segment, and end times of various tests, and then calculates the test segment and total completion time…The analysis continues using subsequent images, and the second index location (e.g., second frame) of the second change of posture from standing to sitting down is recorded); when the number of times the user rises from the chair reaches a reference number of times (Paragraph 0105-- The subject may perform these movements a number of times, such as five times, for example, in order to complete the test. Traditionally, a clinician stands beside the subject and uses a timer to time how long it takes the subject to complete a desired number of times to move from the sitting position to the standing position and back to the sitting position. The device 130 automatically detects and timestamps the start and the end of the test, and then calculates the total completion time), extracting a point corresponding to completion of the test (Paragraph 0105, 0184, 0187-- in at least one embodiment described in accordance with the teachings herein, the device 130, through posture and gait recognition, automatically identifies the start, segment, and end times of various tests, and then calculates the test segment and total completion time), to calculate physical ability information of the user based on a period of time from a start of the test until the hip joint angle value corresponding to the maximum value is extracted (Paragraph 0105, 0183-0184, 0187-- One result of the Sit to Stand test is the total completion time… the device 130 finds the frame difference (i.e., number of frames) between the first and second frames by subtracting the two values for the first and second indices and stores this variable in memory. This frame difference is then projected into differences in seconds by multiplying it with a Seconds Per Frame (SPF) variable that can be obtained by dividing the total number of frames by the total duration of the video clip. The completion time can be obtained by multiplying the frame difference by the SPF).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the device of Jang to additionally monitor a user’s perform in a 5xSTS test as disclosed by Bian in order to improve the device by enabling the monitoring of an additional physical ability which may allow for the determination of risks to the user such as a risk of fall or disability (see Bian, paragraph 0183-- For another example, if the STS test exceeds 10 seconds, the elderly subject is considered to have a higher risk of developing disability) and by utilizing the device to monitor the performance of a physical test which is known in the art and standardized (see Bian, paragraph 0183—internationally recognized standardized physical function assessment tests) and would thus allow for comparisons between users to monitor weaknesses or progress in a training or rehabilitation scheme.
However, the combination of Jang and Bian fails to explicitly disclose when a hip joint angle value included in the sensor data is greater than or equal to a first threshold, determine that the user rises from a chair; when the hip joint angle value is less than or equal to a second threshold, determine that the user sits in the chair; extract, as a feature point, a hip joint angle value corresponding to a minimum value among hip joint angle values measured during a predefine period of time that elapses from a point in time at which it is determined that the user sits in the chair; and estimate the physical ability information of the user based on a period of time from a start of the test until the hip joint angle value corresponding to the minimum value is extracted.
Atrsaei, in the same field of endeavor of monitoring user posture and motions using angle measurements (Abstract), discloses when a hip joint angle value included in the sensor data is greater than or equal to a first threshold, determine that the user rises from a chair; when the hip joint angle value is less than or equal to a second threshold, determine that the user sits in the chair (see Fig. 7). In particular, Fig. 7 demonstrates that with all sensor placement options the hip joint angle value rises to a maximum from ~0 degrees as the user stands such that the user may be determined as rising from a chair when the hip joint angle is greater than a first threshold near zero during the predefined period of time. Fig. 7 additionally demonstrates that with all sensor options, the hip joint angle value decreases after the maximum hip joint angle is reached, indicating that the user sits in the chair, such that it may be determined that the user sits in the chair when the hip joint angle value is less than or equal to a second threshold which is less than the maximum angle during the predefined period of time, and where the user is sitting during the time period having the minimum hip joint angle.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the device of the combined Jang and Bian, wherein Jang discloses monitoring hip joint angles of a user to detect various motion events and wherein Bian discloses performing a 5xSTS test and automatically detecting that a user rises from a chair and sits in a chair to determine a 5xSTS test length, with Atrsaei, which discloses that a hip joint angle greater than or equal to a first threshold corresponds to a user rising from a chair and a hip joint angle value less than or equal to a second threshold corresponds to a user sitting in the chair, in order to extract, a hip joint angle value corresponding to a maximum value appearing immediately before the number of times the user rises from the chair reaches the reference number of times as a feature point in place of the extracted “end point” of Bian; and estimate the physical ability information of the user based on a period of time from a start of the 5xSTS test until the hip joint angle value corresponding to the maximum value is extracted in place of the determined test length of Bian, in order to predictably improve the device by providing a method of determining sit-to-stand and stand-to-sit transitions of a user automatically and objectively using measurements of hip joint angle which would provide increased accuracy compared to a manual or image-based determination by having a consistent threshold to be used to mark each transition which cannot be obscured by clothing, poor lighting, or other environmental conditions.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 14, and 18 and their dependents 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.
Specifically, newly cited reference Jain has been applied to disclose the amended features of recognizing a start and end point of walking and other related limitations. Neither Jang nor Bian is relied upon to disclose these limitations.
Applicant's arguments filed 12 March 2026 with regard to the rejection of claim 12/new claim 21 in view of Atrsaei have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
While applicant argues that the sit-to-stand and stand-to-sit transitions of Atrsaei are not detected using hip joint angles and that these angles are instead used only to compare accuracy of tilt estimation and angular range, it appears from Page 6 (“Tilt angle and anterior-posterior angular range”) and Fig. 7, that the tilt angle, which necessarily relates to the hip joint angles as the hip joint angles change with trunk rotation, is seen to correspond to the ends of these transitions such that in combination with the event detection of Jang the disclosure of Atrsaei appears sufficient to disclose the limitations as currently claimed.
Applicant's arguments filed 12 March 2026 with regard to the rejection of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 101 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
While the applicant argues that the claimed invention constitutes a technical improvement over the prior art with similarity to the Dropbox Inc case, the current claim language does not appear to reflect such an improvement. Namely, it does not appear to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and amount to significantly more as the particular steps of collecting data appear to be within the functions of a general purpose computer and well-understood, routine, or conventional elements (in this case, angle sensors and/or IMUs of a wearable device) that they amount to mere extra-solution activity, where the calculation and determination steps appear to remain abstract ideas capable of being performed in the mind through engagement with the received data. The same is true of new claim 21, which similarly appears to include determinations which may be performed in the human mind while observing data gathered through well-understood, routine, or conventional elements as the comparison of a signal to a threshold and other steps are capable of being performed in the mind. See further discussion above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20140142475 A1 to Goldfarb, which discloses a wearable system including sensors for measuring motion and gait parameters including joint angles, wherein the system may map transitions from sitting to standing and standing to sitting to thresholds of hip joint angles (see claim 24).
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 ANNA ROBERTS whose telephone number is (571)272-7912. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-4:30 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, Alexander Valvis can be reached at (571) 272-4233. 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.
/ANNA ROBERTS/Examiner, Art Unit 3791 /ALEX M VALVIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights