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 .
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) 1-8 and 12-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nashida et al. (EP3550404) in view of Basta et al. (US PGPub. 2016/0007885). Nashida et al. describes substantially the same invention as claimed, including:
PNG
media_image1.png
652
614
media_image1.png
Greyscale
1. Figure 24 of Nashida et al.
Regarding claim 1, Nashida et al. shows: A treadmill system (1500; Figure 24; paras. 128-133), comprising a treadmill (1500) having a treadmill surface (endless belt 1511 and 1510) provided for treading on by a user, wherein optical markers (1531, 1532, para. 130) are formed on the treadmill surface (“A plurality of markers 1531, 1532, and the like are mounted on the endless belt 1511 of the treadmill 1500”), a camera device (1551, 1552) having at least one camera, wherein the camera device is configured for acquiring a temporal image sequence comprising a plurality of images of at least a part of the treadmill surface while capturing the markers (para. 131), and a control device (900) configured for receiving the image sequence from the camera device, determining, based on the image sequence, at least a movement information of the user locomoting on the treadmill (1500) while treading on the treadmill surface (1510), and executing a control function (para. 35, evaluation unit) based on the movement information (para. 128, para. 133), wherein the markers are infrared Each of the markers 1531, 1532, and the like and 1541 and 1542 is an element that emits visible light or invisible light such as infrared light or a visual marker formed as an existing figure pattern. In addition, cameras 1551 and 1552 are installed in the slanted rear side of the right and lefts of the treadmill 1500. When the displacement sensor 941 serving as the displacement information acquisition unit detects images of the markers 1531, 1532, and the like and 1541 and 1542 from images captured by the cameras 1551 and 1552, 3-dimensional position information of the markers 1531, 1532, and the like and 1541 and 1542 can be calculated on the basis of triangulation or the like.”).
As noted by
However, Basta, from the same field of endeavor, teaches that it is known in the treadmill art to use reflective infrared markers on a treadmill surface (Basta para. 36: “In one specific embodiment, the sensors of the self-contained biometric sensor system are positioned over the treadmill belt so that reflectivity of the belt surface under the sensor(s) can be measured. In one specific embodiment, the sensors are an infrared emitter/detector pair (sensor). Next, applying a strip of reflective material of a precise, known length to the treadmill belt. The applying step is performed so that reflectivity of the belt surface changes dramatically while the strip is under the sensor. The type of strip and placement will vary depending upon the specific sensor type and placement on the treadmill. Next, using sensor output signals in conjunction with microprocessor clock timestamp a period of high reflectivity is used to determine the treadmill speed.”).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to substitute or complement the system of Nashida et al. with infrared reflective markers on the tread belt surface as taught by Basta et al. Doing so provides the predictable result of reducing manufacturing costs by putting reflective elements, which are cheaper than infrared emitters, on the tread belt so that replacement is cheaper and easier when expected wear and tear occurs. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to modify Nashida et al. as taught by Basta et al. to obtain the invention as claimed.
Regarding claim 2, Basta et al. teaches wherein the camera device further comprises an infrared light arranged for irradiating at least the part of the treadmill surface (Basta para. 36: “In one specific embodiment, the sensors of the self-contained biometric sensor system are positioned over the treadmill belt so that reflectivity of the belt surface under the sensor(s) can be measured. In one specific embodiment, the sensors are an infrared emitter/detector pair (sensor). Next, applying a strip of reflective material of a precise, known length to the treadmill belt. The applying step is performed so that reflectivity of the belt surface changes dramatically while the strip is under the sensor. The type of strip and placement will vary depending upon the specific sensor type and placement on the treadmill. Next, using sensor output signals in conjunction with microprocessor clock timestamp a period of high reflectivity is used to determine the treadmill speed.”). See rationale in claim 1 above for combining Nashinda et al. and Basta et al.
Regarding claim 3, Nashida et al. shows wherein the markers are arranged such as to form at least a first track (1531, 1532) and a second track (1541, 1542), and wherein the markers of the first track or of the second track are arranged periodically on the treadmill surface, respectively (Fig. 24).
Regarding claim 4, Nashida et al. shows wherein markers of the first track are arranged closer to each other or designed differently than markers of the second track, or wherein the first track extends parallel to the second track (Fig. 24), or wherein the first track or the second track extend straight at least in sections (Fig. 24), or wherein the markers are arranged such as to further form a third track, which extends transversely to the first track or the second track.
Regarding claim 5, Nashida et al. shows wherein the markers comprise a plurality of differently configured reference markers (1531, 1532, 1541, 1542) which are arranged at corners of an imaginary polygon on the tread-mill surface, and wherein the plurality of images of the temporal image sequence are subjected to an image correction, in particular are perspectively equalized, by means of the camera device on the basis of the reference markers (Nashida para. 131: “3-dimensional position information of the markers 1531, 1532, and the like and 1541 and 1542 can be calculated on the basis of triangulation or the like” Also see paras. 233 and 282).
Regarding claim 6, Nashida et al. shows wherein a single-colored central strip is formed on the treadmill surface (Nashida et al.’s tread surface, endless belt 1511, itself is considered a “single-colored central strip” when giving that term its broadest reasonable interpretation).
Regarding claim 7, Nashida et al. shows wherein the movement information comprises a locomotion speed of the user on the treadmill surface (para. 132: “When the endless belt 1511 moves circularly, the markers 1531, 1532, and the like mounted on the endless belt 1511 are moved straightly. Accordingly, the displacement sensor 941 serving as the displacement information acquisition unit can acquire a speed at which the user is running or walking on the endless belt 1511 on the basis of a movement amount per unit time of each of the markers 1531, 1532, and the like on the endless belt 1511.”), a position or a time of a tread of the user onto the treadmill surface or an orientation of a foot of the user at the time of the tread.
Regarding claim 8, Nashida et al. shows wherein the control device comprises a speed determining device which is configured for determining from the image sequence at least one temporal intensity profile at a predetermined location in the plurality of images and to determine, based on the at least one intensity profile, the locomotion speed of the user as part of the movement information (para. 132).
Regarding claim 12, Nashida et al. shows wherein the treadmill system further comprises a display device (1520), and wherein the control function comprises controlling the display device to display the movement information (para. 128).
Regarding claim 13, Nashida et al. shows wherein the display device comprises a projection device arranged to project the movement information onto the treadmill surface, in particular onto the part of the treadmill surface (Nashida et al.: “the system 900 includes two or more projectors 103 104, and the like that project videos to the dome screen 101 as the video display system.”, as evidenced by Brunner (US PGPub. 2015/0173652, depicting projector 7 directed at the treadmill surface).
Regarding claim 14, Nashida et al. shows according to wherein the camera is provided with an optical filter attenuating visible light, and wherein the optical filter is arranged on an optical axis of the camera (in order to limit corruption of reflected IR from the markers by visible light).
Regarding claim 15, Nashida et al. shows wherein the treadmill surface is configured as a surface of a mat, and wherein the mat is provided with a mounting device by means of which the mat is non- destructively reversibly attachable to lamellae of the treadmill (endless belt 1511 meets this structure, when giving the claim terms their broadest reasonable interpretation).
Regarding claim 16, Nashida et al. shows A kit for upgrading a treadmill to a treadmill system according to claim 15, comprising the camera device, the control device, as well as the mat having the mounting device (Fig. 24).
Regarding claim 17, Nashida et al. shows wherein the markers comprise at least 4 of the reference markers (1531, 1532, 1541, 1542).
Regarding claim 18, Nashida et al. shows wherein the strip extends in a longitudinal direction of the treadmill (Nashida et al.’s tread surface, endless belt 1511, itself is considered a “single-colored central strip” when giving that term its broadest reasonable interpretation, the endless belt extends in a longitudinal direction of the treadmill as required by the claim).
Claims 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nashida et al. (EP3550404) in view of Basta et al. (US PGPub. 2016/0007885) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kurono (US PGPub. 2002/0130951). Nashida et al. describes the invention substantially as claimed, but does not expressly disclose:
Regarding claim 9, Kurono teaches wherein the control device is configured for determining, in at least a first image, a second image and a third image of the plurality of images, respectively, an image object having the largest area and/or contour (Kurono para. 59a user’s foot adjacent a marker, para. 59: “Foot leading end detection section 31 detects the position of the foot leading end 3 of subject 1 by sequentially acquiring images picked up by video camera 50 for stride length. Landing determination section 32 ascertains whether or not the foot leading end 3 that has been detected has landed on running surface 26. Moving marker identification section 36 sequentially acquires images picked up by video camera 50 for stride length; identifies a marker 24; compares the position of this marker 24 with the position of the marker 24 in the image picked up at the previous time; associates markers 24 between the two images; it then attaches to the marker 24 in this image the same identification number as the corresponding marker 24 in the image that was previously picked up; and attaches a new identification number to the marker 24 that is newly picked up. Landing position acquisition section 33 acquires the distance in the drive direction A of running surface 26 of foot leading end 3 and marker 24 in the image when it is ascertained that the foot leading end 3 has landed on running surface 26, and acquires the identification number of this marker 24.” Examiner notes the “largest are” is considered the user’s foot adjacent to a marker).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to include the stride detection of Kurono with the system of Nashida. Doing so provides the predictable result of allowing the system to analyze the user’s stride for feedback and performance improvement. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to modify Nashida as taught by Kurono to obtain the invention as claimed.
Regarding claim 10, Kurono teaches wherein the control device comprises a tread determining device configured for: determining a first movement direction of the foot of the user based on a first position of the image object in the first image and a second position of the image object in the second image, determining a second movement direction of the foot of the user on the basis of the second position of the image object in the second image and a third position of the image object in the third image, and, if an angle between the first movement direction and the second movement direction exceeds a predetermined threshold value, ascertaining the tread of the user on the tread surface (Kurono para. 60: “[0060] Using the distances between the foot leading end 3 and marker 24 at two adjacent landing points and the distance between these markers 24 obtained based on the identification numbers of the respective markers 24 referenced at their landing points, stride length acquisition section 34 acquires the stride length of subject 1. Various data calculation section 38 acquires data such as the stride time from the stride length data etc. Individual data storage section 37 stores stride length data etc for each individual. Data comparison section 39 acquires comparison data by comparing the stride length data stored in individual data storage section 37 and the stride length data acquired by the stride length acquisition section 34.”).
See rationale in claim 9 above for combining Kurono and Nashida.
Regarding claim 11, Kurono teaches wherein the control device further comprises a foot orientation detection device con- figured for determining, in the second image, a minimum bounding polygon for the image object as well as a main extension direction of the minimum bounding polygon, wherein the movement information comprises the main extension direction (para. 60).
See rationale in claim 9 above for combining Kurono and Nashida.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/26/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Nishida et al. disclose a visual marker but does not teach or suggest an infrared reflective marker. Examiner notes that Basta et al. has been relied upon for this feature, see rejections above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUNDHARA M GANESAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3340. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30AM-5:30PM.
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, LoAn Jimenez can be reached on (571)272-4966. 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.
/SUNDHARA M GANESAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784