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 .
The amendment filed 5/26/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1-28 are pending.
Claims 1-28 stand rejected.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 14 are objected to because of the following: each of Claims 1 and 14 recite: “physiologic data regarding the athletic performance” (emphasis added). However, an “athletic performance” is not recited earlier in each of Claims 1 and 14. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In regard to Claim 1, Claim 1 recites: “sense physiologic data regarding the athletic performance of the player and transmit the data to the player network hub” (emphasis added). It is unclear whether “the data” is the same as or different from the earlier recited “physiologic data”. The examiner will treat the above claim excerpt to state: sense physiologic data regarding the athletic performance of the player and transmit the physiologic data to the player network hub.
Claims 2-13 are rejected through dependence from Claim 1.
In regard to Claims 3-5 and 8, each of Claims 3-5 and 8 recite “the data”, and it is unclear whether each of these instances of “the data” is the same as or different from the “physiologic data” recited in Claim 1, which Claims 3-5 and 8 depend from. The examiner will treat each of these instances to state: the physiologic data.
In regard to Claim 14, Claim 14 recites: “sense physiologic data regarding the athletic performance of the player and transmit the data to the player network hub” (emphasis added). It is unclear whether “the data” is the same as or different from the earlier recited “physiologic data”. The examiner will treat the above claim excerpt to state: sense physiologic data regarding the athletic performance of the player and transmit the physiologic data to the player network hub.
Claims 15-28 are rejected through dependence from Claim 14.
In regard to Claims 16-18 and 22-23, each of Claims 3-5 and 8 recite “the data”, and it is unclear whether each of these instances of “the data” is the same as or different from the “physiologic data” recited in Claim 14, which Claims 16-18 and 22-23 depend from. The examiner will treat each of these instances to state: the physiologic data.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana et al. (Pub. No.: US 20080002031 A1) and Teague (Pub. No.: US 20100315225 A1), hereafter respectively referred to as Cana and Teague.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite A system, comprising: a player network hub configured to: form a body area network with peripheral devices by communicating wirelessly according to a first wireless protocol; and transmit location information according to a second wireless protocol different than the first wireless protocol; and relay network hubs configured to form a wide area network with the player network hub and a master network hub by communicating, at least in part, according to the second wireless protocol, wherein the relay network hubs are configured to receive the location information from the player network hub and wherein at least one of the relay network hubs or the master network hub are configured to determine a location of the player network hub based on the location information; wherein the relay network hubs each have a relative known location.
Claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 fails to clearly recite wherein the relay network hubs each have a relative known location with respect to a reference and wherein the at least one of the relay network hubs or the master network hub are configured to determine a location of the player network hub according to the reference; wherein the reference is a field of play and wherein the player network hub is configured to be associated with a player of an athletic event on the field of play, the athletic performance of the player.
Cana teaches wherein the relay network hubs (tracking and control unit 14 which may be connected to other tracking and control units 16, Para. 23, FIG. 1) each have a relative known location (The tracking and control unit includes a locating device, and from the location information from a selected TAG determines angular displacement from a reference and distance from the tracking and control unit, Para. 5. Determine the location of the selected TAG and the location of the base unit, such as to which a video camera is mounted, Para. 36, FIG. 13) with respect to a reference (determines angular displacement from a reference and distance from the tracking and control unit, Para. 5. Recording positions in a sports field of play. Known locations could include selected distance from the corners of the rectangular field of play. Determine the relative location of a TAG of various transmitters adjacent the field of play, Para. 44).
Cana teaches wherein the at least one of the relay network hubs or the master network hub are configured to determine a location of the player network hub according to the reference (In step 328, a wireless signal is received from the selected TAG and from TAG associated with the base unit to determine the location of the selected TAG and the location of the base unit, such as to which a video camera is mounted. In step 330, the target and control unit performs direction and distance calculations from the location information received from the TAG selected for targeting and from location information from the TAG associated with the base unit, Para. 36, FIG. 13).
Cana teaches wherein the reference is a field of play (determines angular displacement from a reference and distance from the tracking and control unit, Para. 5. Recording positions in a sports field of play. Known locations could include selected distance from the corners of the rectangular field of play, Para. 44) and wherein the player network hub is configured to be associated with a player of an athletic event on the field of play (a TAG worn by a particular player in a sports field of play, Para. 33, FIG. 10. Determine the relative location of a TAG of various transmitters adjacent the field of play, Para. 44).
Cana teaches the athletic performance of the player (Processor 114 applies various algorithms to determine the speed for a TAG being tracked, Para. 26, FIGS. 4, 5. The processor 264 applies an algorithm for determining the speed relating to the various TAGs polled, Para. 33, FIG. 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Cana with the limitations of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 since Cana provides a technique for multi-axis control of a fixed or moving device based on a wireless tracking location of one or many target devices (see Cana, paragraph [0004]), which can be introduced in the limitations of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 to permit medical information tracking of participants in a group activity involving potential injuries occurring within a certain area of activity.
Claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana fails to clearly recite wherein the peripheral devices are configured to be associated with the player; and wherein at least one of the peripheral devices is configured to sense physiologic data regarding the player and transmit the data to the player network hub according to the first wireless protocol.
Teague teaches wherein the peripheral devices (miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 34, FIG. 1) are configured to be associated with the player (miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d on patients, Para. 36, FIG. 1. Patient data from miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 49, FIGS. 1, 8).
Teague teaches wherein at least one of the peripheral devices is configured to sense physiologic data regarding the player (patient data from miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 49, FIGS. 1, 8) and transmit the data to the player network hub (gateway wristband 1 is configured to collect and store patient data from miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 49, FIGS. 1, 8) according to the first wireless protocol (gateway wristband 1 to receive sensor data from the miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d in a first communication protocol, such as PAN communication links 10, Para. 34, FIG. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Teague with the limitations of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana since Teague provides a technique for transferring medical data across a network, which can be introduced in the limitations of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana to permit medical information to be utilized in association with location information.
Claim 2 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 17 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana and Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein the player network hub is configured to be secured with respect to a player involved in an athletic activity.
Claim 3 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 18 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana and Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein the player network hub is configured to receive data transmitted form the peripheral devices and transmit the data to at least one of the relay network hubs.
Claim 4 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana, Teague, and further in view of St. Laurent et al. (Pub. No.: US 20130211270 A1), hereafter referred to as St. Laurent. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite physiologic data.
Claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana and Teague fails to clearly recite the data is physiologic data regarding the athletic performance of the player includes at least one of moisture or sweat of the player.
St. Laurent teaches the data is physiologic data regarding the athletic performance of the player includes at least one of moisture (One or more monitoring devices can be given, for example, to one or more athletes competing in an activity on an athletic field, Para. 28. Number of biometric sensors that measure vital signs such as moisture level, Para. 32. The biometric sensor 106 comprises a moisture sensor, Para. 36, FIG. 1. When other sensors are included in the biometric sensor 106, other data can be reported in the same way, including but not limited to, moisture content, Para. 41. In FIG. 2, the biometric sensor 206 includes not only acceleration sensors, but also a moisture sensor 222, Para. 42, FIG. 2) or sweat of the player (one or more athletes, Para. 28).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of St. Laurent with the limitations of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana and Teague since St. Laurent provides a technique for presenting location information along with biometric information (see St. Laurent, paragraphs [0093—0095]), which can be introduced in the limitations of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana and Teague to permit detailed information of gateway wristband wearers to be communicated and presented to appropriate personnel.
Claim 5 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana and Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein the data is indicative of a proximity of an auxiliary device to one of the peripheral devices.
Claim 6 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 21 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana and Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein the auxiliary device is equipment utilized in the athletic activity.
Claim 21 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana and Teague fails to clearly recite athletic activity including at least one of a ball, a bat, or a golf club.
Cana teaches equipment utilized in the athletic activity including at least one of a ball (The proximity TAG may be mounted to a game ball, such as for basketball, football and soccer, or a hockey puck, and such, Para. 38, 44), a bat, or a golf club.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Cana with the limitations of claim 21 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 since Cana provides a technique for multi-axis control of a fixed or moving device based on a wireless tracking location of one or many target devices (see Cana, paragraph [0004]), which can be introduced in the limitations of claim 21 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 to permit medical information tracking of participants in a group activity involving potential injuries occurring within a certain area of activity.
Claim 7 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 22 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana and Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein the player network hub is integrated in at least one of apparel or an article configured to be worn by the player.
Claim 8 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 8 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana and Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein: the player network hub is configured to transit the data to at least one of the relay network hubs; the at least one relay network hubs are configured to transmit the data regarding the player to the master network hub; and the master network hub is configured to at least one of determine analytics based on the data and cause the data to be presented on a user interface.
Claim 9 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 16 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana and Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite an antenna configured to communicate according to the second wireless protocol; and a location circuit configured to determine the location information.
Claim 10 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana and Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein location information is based on a distance between the player network hub and the relay network hub, wherein the at least one of the relay network hubs or the master network hub are configured to determine the location of the player network hub by triangulating the distance information determined by the location circuit of multiple ones of the relay network hubs.
Claim 11 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 12 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana and Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite the relay network hubs each further comprise a wireless communication tag comprising the antenna, the location circuit, a data port, and a microcontroller configured to manage the location circuit and data reception and transmission via the data port.
Claim 12 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 13 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana and Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein the player network hub comprises the wireless communication tag, wherein the location circuit is configured to transmit a data packet to the relay network hubs via the antenna, and wherein the location circuit of the relay network hub is configured to determine a distance between the player network hub and the relay network hub based on the data packet.
Claim 14 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 23 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana et al. (Pub. No.: US 20080002031 A1) and Teague (Pub. No.: US 20100315225 A1), hereafter respectively referred to as Cana and Teague.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite A method, comprising: forming, with a player network hub a body area network with peripheral devices by communicating wirelessly according to a first wireless protocol; and transmitting, with the player network hub, location information according to a second wireless protocol different than the first wireless protocol; and forming, with relay network hubs, a wide area network with the player network hub and a master network hub by communicating, at least in part, according to the second wireless protocol, wherein the relay network hubs are configured to receive the location information from the player network hub and wherein at least one of the relay network hubs or the master network hub are configured to determine a location of the player network hub based on the location information; .
Claim 23 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 fails to clearly recite determining, with at least one of the relay network hubs or the master network hub, a location of the player network hub according to a relative known location of the relay network hubs with respect to a reference; wherein the reference is a field of play and wherein the player network hub is configured to be associated with a player of an athletic event on the field of play; the athletic performance of the player.
Cana teaches determining, with at least one of the relay network hubs or the master network hub, a location of the player network hub (In step 328, a wireless signal is received from the selected TAG and from TAG associated with the base unit to determine the location of the selected TAG and the location of the base unit, such as to which a video camera is mounted. In step 330, the target and control unit performs direction and distance calculations from the location information received from the TAG selected for targeting and from location information from the TAG associated with the base unit, Para. 36, FIG. 13) according to a relative known location (The tracking and control unit includes a locating device, and from the location information from a selected TAG determines angular displacement from a reference and distance from the tracking and control unit, Para. 5. Determine the location of the selected TAG and the location of the base unit, such as to which a video camera is mounted, Para. 36, FIG. 13) of the relay network hubs (tracking and control unit 14 which may be connected to other tracking and control units 16, Para. 23, FIG. 1) with respect to a reference (determines angular displacement from a reference and distance from the tracking and control unit, Para. 5. Recording positions in a sports field of play. Known locations could include selected distance from the corners of the rectangular field of play. Determine the relative location of a TAG of various transmitters adjacent the field of play, Para. 44).
Cana teaches wherein the reference is a field of play (determines angular displacement from a reference and distance from the tracking and control unit, Para. 5. Recording positions in a sports field of play. Known locations could include selected distance from the corners of the rectangular field of play, Para. 44) and wherein the player network hub is configured to be associated with a player of an athletic event on the field of play (a TAG worn by a particular player in a sports field of play, Para. 33, FIG. 10. Determine the relative location of a TAG of various transmitters adjacent the field of play, Para. 44).
Cana teaches the athletic performance of the player (Processor 114 applies various algorithms to determine the speed for a TAG being tracked, Para. 26, FIGS. 4, 5. The processor 264 applies an algorithm for determining the speed relating to the various TAGs polled, Para. 33, FIG. 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Cana with the limitations of claim 23 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 since Cana provides a technique for multi-axis control of a fixed or moving device based on a wireless tracking location of one or many target devices (see Cana, paragraph [0004]), which can be introduced in the limitations of claim 23 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 to permit medical information tracking of participants in a group activity involving potential injuries occurring within a certain area of activity.
Claim 23 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana fails to clearly recite wherein the peripheral devices are configured to be associated with the player; and wherein at least one of the peripheral devices is configured to sense physiologic data regarding the player and transmit the data to the player network hub according to the first wireless protocol.
Teague teaches wherein the peripheral devices (miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 34, FIG. 1)are configured to be associated with the player (miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d on patients, Para. 36, FIG. 1. Patient data from miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 49, FIGS. 1, 8).
Teague teaches wherein at least one of the peripheral devices is configured to sense physiologic data regarding the player (patient data from miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 49, FIGS. 1, 8) and transmit the data to the player network hub (gateway wristband 1 is configured to collect and store patient data from miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 49, FIGS. 1, 8) according to the first wireless protocol (gateway wristband 1 to receive sensor data from the miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d in a first communication protocol, such as PAN communication links 10, Para. 34, FIG. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Teague with the limitations of claim 23 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana since Teague provides a technique for transferring medical data across a network, which can be introduced in the limitations of claim 23 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana to permit medical information to be utilized in association with location information.
Claim 15 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 39 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana and Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite further comprising securing the player network hub with respect to a player involved in an athletic activity.
Claim 16 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 40 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana and Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite further comprising: receiving, with the player network hub, data transmitted form the peripheral devices; and transmitting the data to at least one of the relay network hubs.
Claim 17 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 23 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana, Teague, and further in view of St. Laurent et al. (Pub. No.: US 20130211270 A1), hereafter referred to as St. Laurent. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite physiologic data.
Claim 23 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana and Teague fails to clearly recite the data is physiologic data regarding the athletic performance of the player includes at least one of moisture or sweat of the player.
St. Laurent teaches the data is physiologic data regarding the athletic performance of the player includes at least one of moisture (One or more monitoring devices can be given, for example, to one or more athletes competing in an activity on an athletic field, Para. 28. Number of biometric sensors that measure vital signs such as moisture level, Para. 32. The biometric sensor 106 comprises a moisture sensor, Para. 36, FIG. 1. When other sensors are included in the biometric sensor 106, other data can be reported in the same way, including but not limited to, moisture content, Para. 41. In FIG. 2, the biometric sensor 206 includes not only acceleration sensors, but also a moisture sensor 222, Para. 42, FIG. 2) or sweat of the player (one or more athletes, Para. 28).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of St. Laurent with the limitations of claim 23 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana and Teague since St. Laurent provides a technique for presenting location information along with biometric information (see St. Laurent, paragraphs [0093—0095]), which can be introduced in the limitations of claim 23 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana and Teague to permit detailed information of gateway wristband wearers to be communicated and presented to appropriate personnel.
Claim 18 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 42 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana and Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein the data is indicative of a proximity of an auxiliary device to one of the peripheral devices.
Claim 19 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 43 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana and Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein the auxiliary device is equipment utilized in the athletic activity.
Claim 43 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana and Teague fails to clearly recite athletic activity including at least one of a ball, a bat, or a golf club.
Cana teaches athletic activity including at least one of a ball (The proximity TAG may be mounted to a game ball, such as for basketball, football and soccer, or a hockey puck, and such, Para. 38, 44), a bat, or a golf club.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Cana with the limitations of claim 43 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 since Cana provides a technique for multi-axis control of a fixed or moving device based on a wireless tracking location of one or many target devices (see Cana, paragraph [0004]), which can be introduced in the limitations of claim 43 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 to permit medical information tracking of participants in a group activity involving potential injuries occurring within a certain area of activity.
Claim 20 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 44 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana and Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein the player network hub is integrated in at least one of apparel or an article worn by the player.
Claim 21 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 27 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana and Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein the reference is a field of play and wherein the player network hub is associated with a player of an athletic event on the field of play.
Claim 22 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 29 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana and Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein the peripheral devices are associated with the player and wherein at least one of the peripheral devices senses data regarding the player and transmits the data to the player network hubs according to the first wireless protocol.
Claim 23 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 30 of U.S. Patent No. 11,096,140 in view of Cana and Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite further comprising: transmitting, with the player network hub, the data to at least one of the relay network hubs; transmitting, with the at least one relay network hub, the data regarding the player to the master network hub; determining, with the master network hub, analytics based on the data; and causing the data to be presented on a user interface.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague (Pub. No.: US 20100315225 A1), hereafter referred to as Teague.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite A system, comprising: a player network hub configured to: form a body area network with peripheral devices by communicating wirelessly according to a first wireless protocol; and transmit location information according to a second wireless protocol different than the first wireless protocol; and relay network hubs configured to form a wide area network with the player network hub and a master network hub by communicating, at least in part, according to the second wireless protocol, wherein the relay network hubs are configured to receive the location information from the player network hub and wherein at least one of the relay network hubs or the master network hub are configured to determine a location of the player network hub based on the location information; wherein the relay network hubs each have a relative known location with respect to a reference and wherein the at least one of the relay network hubs or the master network hub are configured to determine a location of the player network hub according to the reference; wherein the reference is a field of play and wherein the player network hub is configured to be associated with a player of an athletic event on the field of play; the athletic performance of the player.
Claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 fails to clearly recite wherein the peripheral devices are configured to be associated with the player; and wherein at least one of the peripheral devices is configured to sense physiologic data regarding the player and transmit the data to the player network hubs according to the first wireless protocol.
Teague teaches wherein the peripheral devices (miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 34, FIG. 1) are configured to be associated with the player (miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d on patients, Para. 36, FIG. 1. Patient data from miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 49, FIGS. 1, 8).
Teague teaches wherein at least one of the peripheral devices is configured to sense physiologic data regarding the player (patient data from miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 49, FIGS. 1, 8) and transmit the data to the player network hubs (gateway wristband 1 is configured to collect and store patient data from miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 49, FIGS. 1, 8) according to the first wireless protocol (gateway wristband 1 to receive sensor data from the miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d in a first communication protocol, such as PAN communication links 10, Para. 34, FIG. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Teague with the limitations of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 since Teague provides a technique for transferring medical data across a network, which can be introduced in the limitations of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 to permit medical information to be utilized in association with location information.
Claim 2 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein the player network hub is configured to be secured with respect to a player involved in an athletic activity.
Claim 3 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein the player network hub is configured to receive data transmitted form the peripheral devices and transmit the data to at least one of the relay network hubs.
Claim 4 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague and further in view of St. Laurent et al. (Pub. No.: US 20130211270 A1). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite physiologic data.
Claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague fails to clearly recite the data is physiologic data regarding the athletic performance of the player includes at least one of moisture or sweat of the player.
St. Laurent teaches the data is physiologic data regarding the athletic performance of the player includes at least one of moisture (One or more monitoring devices can be given, for example, to one or more athletes competing in an activity on an athletic field, Para. 28. Number of biometric sensors that measure vital signs such as moisture level, Para. 32. The biometric sensor 106 comprises a moisture sensor, Para. 36, FIG. 1. When other sensors are included in the biometric sensor 106, other data can be reported in the same way, including but not limited to, moisture content, Para. 41. In FIG. 2, the biometric sensor 206 includes not only acceleration sensors, but also a moisture sensor 222, Para. 42, FIG. 2) or sweat of the player (one or more athletes, Para. 28).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of St. Laurent with the limitations of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague since St. Laurent provides a technique for presenting location information along with biometric information (see St. Laurent, paragraphs [0093—0095]), which can be introduced in the limitations of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague to permit detailed information of gateway wristband wearers to be communicated and presented to appropriate personnel.
Claim 5 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite the data is indicative of a proximity of an auxiliary device to one of the peripheral devices.
Claim 6 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague, and further in view of Cana et al. (Pub. No.: US 20080002031 A1). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite the auxiliary device is equipment utilized in the athletic activity.
Claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague fails to clearly recite athletic activity including at least one of a ball, a bat, or a golf club.
Cana teaches athletic activity including at least one of a ball (The proximity TAG may be mounted to a game ball, such as for basketball, football and soccer, or a hockey puck, and such, Para. 38, 44), a bat, or a golf club.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Cana with the limitations of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague since Cana provides a technique for multi-axis control of a fixed or moving device based on a wireless tracking location of one or many target devices (see Cana, paragraph [0004]), which can be introduced in the limitations of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague to permit medical information tracking of participants in a group activity involving potential injuries occurring within a certain area of activity.
Claim 7 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein the auxiliary device is equipment utilized in the athletic activity.
Claim 8 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 5 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein: the player network hub is configured to transit the data to at least one of the relay network hubs; the at least one relay network hubs are configured to transmit the data regarding the player to the master network hub; and the master network hub is configured to at least one of determine analytics based on the data and cause the data to be presented on a user interface.
Claim 9 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 6 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein the relay network hubs comprise: an antenna configured to communicate according to the second wireless protocol; and a location circuit configured to determine the location information.
Claim 10 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 7 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein location information is based on a distance between the player network hub and the relay network hub, wherein the at least one of the relay network hubs or the master network hub are configured to determine the location of the player network hub by triangulating the distance information determined by the location circuit of multiple ones of the relay network hubs.
Claim 11 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 8 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein the relay network hubs each further comprise a wireless communication tag comprising the antenna, the location circuit, a data port, and a microcontroller configured to manage the location circuit and data reception and transmission via the data port.
Claim 12 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein the player network hub comprises the wireless communication tag, wherein the location circuit is configured to transmit a data packet to the relay network hubs via the antenna, and wherein the location circuit of the relay network hub is configured to determine a distance between the player network hub and the relay network hub based on the data packet.
Claim 13 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 10 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein the player network hub comprises: a body area network hub configured to communicate according to the first wireless protocol, wherein the body area network hub comprises an antenna and a communication module configured to communicate according to the first wireless protocol; and a wireless communication tag, coupled to the body area network hub, configured to communicate according to the second wireless protocol, wherein the wireless communication tag comprises: a location circuit configured to generate a location packet; an antenna configured to transmit the location packet to at least some of the relay network hubs according to the second wireless protocol.
Claim 14 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague (Pub. No.: US 20100315225 A1), hereafter referred to as Teague.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite A method, comprising: forming, with a player network hub a body area network with peripheral devices by communicating wirelessly according to a first wireless protocol; and transmitting, with the player network hub, location information according to a second wireless protocol different than the first wireless protocol; and forming, with relay network hubs, a wide area network with the player network hub and a master network hub by communicating, at least in part, according to the second wireless protocol, wherein the relay network hubs are configured to receive the location information from the player network hub and wherein at least one of the relay network hubs or the master network hub are configured to determine a location of the player network hub based on the location information; determining, with at least one of the relay network hubs or the master network hub, a location of the player network hub according to a relative known location of the relay network hubs with respect to a reference; wherein the reference is a field of play and wherein the player network hub is configured to be associated with a player of an athletic event on the field of play; the athletic performance of the player.
Claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 fails to clearly recite wherein the peripheral devices are configured to be associated with the player; and wherein at least one of the peripheral devices is configured to sense physiologic data regarding the player and transmit the data to the player network hub according to the first wireless protocol.
Teague teaches wherein the peripheral devices (miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 34, FIG. 1) are configured to be associated with the player (miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d on patients, Para. 36, FIG. 1. Patient data from miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 49, FIGS. 1, 8).
Teague teaches wherein at least one of the peripheral devices is configured to sense physiologic data regarding the player (patient data from miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 49, FIGS. 1, 8) and transmit the data to the player network hub (gateway wristband 1 is configured to collect and store patient data from miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 49, FIGS. 1, 8) according to the first wireless protocol (gateway wristband 1 to receive sensor data from the miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d in a first communication protocol, such as PAN communication links 10, Para. 34, FIG. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Teague with the limitations of claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 since Teague provides a technique for transferring medical data across a network, which can be introduced in the limitations of claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 to permit medical information to be utilized in association with location information.
Claim 15 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite further comprising securing the player network hub with respect to a player involved in an athletic activity.
Claim 16 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite further comprising: receiving, with the player network hub, data transmitted form the peripheral devices; and transmitting the data to at least one of the relay network hubs.
Claim 17 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague, and further in view of St. Laurent et al. (Pub. No.: US 20130211270 A1), hereafter referred to as St. Laurent. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite physiologic data.
Claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague fails to clearly recite the data is physiologic data regarding the athletic performance of the player includes at least one of moisture or sweat of the player.
St. Laurent teaches the data is physiologic data regarding the athletic performance of the player includes at least one of moisture (One or more monitoring devices can be given, for example, to one or more athletes competing in an activity on an athletic field, Para. 28. Number of biometric sensors that measure vital signs such as moisture level, Para. 32. The biometric sensor 106 comprises a moisture sensor, Para. 36, FIG. 1. When other sensors are included in the biometric sensor 106, other data can be reported in the same way, including but not limited to, moisture content, Para. 41. In FIG. 2, the biometric sensor 206 includes not only acceleration sensors, but also a moisture sensor 222, Para. 42, FIG. 2) or sweat of the player (one or more athletes, Para. 28).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of St. Laurent with the limitations of claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague since St. Laurent provides a technique for presenting location information along with biometric information (see St. Laurent, paragraphs [0093—0095]), which can be introduced in the limitations of claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague to permit detailed information of gateway wristband wearers to be communicated and presented to appropriate personnel.
Claim 18 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein the data is indicative of a proximity of an auxiliary device to one of the peripheral devices.
Claim 19 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague, and further in view of Cana et al. (Pub. No.: US 20080002031 A1), hereafter referred to as Cana. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein the auxiliary device is equipment utilized in the athletic activity.
Claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague fails to clearly recite the athletic activity including at least one of a ball, a bat, or a golf club.
Cana teaches the athletic activity including at least one of a ball (The proximity TAG may be mounted to a game ball, such as for basketball, football and soccer, or a hockey puck, and such, Para. 38, 44), a bat, or a golf club.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Cana with the limitations of claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague since Cana provides a technique for multi-axis control of a fixed or moving device based on a wireless tracking location of one or many target devices (see Cana, paragraph [0004]), which can be introduced in the limitations of claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151 in view of Teague to permit medical information tracking of participants in a group activity involving potential injuries occurring within a certain area of activity.
Claim 20 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 13 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein the player network hub is integrated in at least one of apparel or an article worn by the player.
Claim 21 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein the reference is a field of play and wherein the player network hub is associated with a player of an athletic event on the field of play.
Claim 22 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 14 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein the peripheral devices are associated with the player and wherein at least one of the peripheral devices senses data regarding the player and transmits the data to the player network hubs according to the first wireless protocol.
Claim 23 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 15 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite further comprising: transmitting, with the player network hub, the data to at least one of the relay network hubs; transmitting, with the at least one relay network hub, the data regarding the player to the master network hub; determining, with the master network hub, analytics based on the data; and causing the data to be presented on a user interface.
Claim 24 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 16 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein the relay network hubs comprise: an antenna configured to communicate according to the second wireless protocol; and a location circuit configured to determine the location information.
Claim 25 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 17 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein location information is based on a distance between the player network hub and the relay network hub, and further comprising: determining, with the at least one of the relay network hubs or the master network hub, the location of the player network hub by triangulating the distance information determined by the location circuit of multiple ones of the relay network hubs.
Claim 26 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 18 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein the relay network hubs each further comprise a wireless communication tag comprising the antenna, the location circuit, a data port, and a microcontroller configured to manage the location circuit and data reception and transmission via the data port.
Claim 27 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 19 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite wherein the player network hub comprises the wireless communication tag, and further comprising: transmitting, with the location circuit, a data packet to the relay network hubs via the antenna; and determining, with the location circuit of the relay network hub, a distance between the player network hub and the relay network hub based on the data packet.
Claim 28 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,151. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both conflicting claims recite further comprising: the player network hub comprises: communicating, with a body area network hub of the player network hub, according to the first wireless protocol, wherein the body area network hub comprises an antenna and a communication module configured to communicate according to the first wireless protocol; and communicating, with a wireless communication tag of the player network hub, according to the second wireless protocol; wherein the wireless communication tag comprises: generating, with a location circuit of the wireless communication tag, a location packet; and transmitting, with an antenna of the wireless communication tag, the location packet to at least some of the relay network hubs according to the second wireless protocol.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-3, 7-16 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Teague (Pub. No.: US 20100315225 A1) in view of Chien (Patent No.: US 6512478 B1) and Cana et al. (Pub. No.: US 20080002031 A1), hereafter respectively referred to as Teague, Chien, and Cana.
In regard to Claim 1, Teague teaches A system (a communication system, Para. 34, FIG. 1), comprising: a player network hub (gateway wristband 1, Para. 34, FIG. 1) configured to: form a body area network (The gateway wristband may serve as a wireless gateway for a wireless personal area network (PAN), Para. 5) with peripheral devices (miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 34, FIG. 1) by communicating wirelessly according to a first wireless protocol (gateway wristband 1 to receive sensor data from the miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d in a first communication protocol, such as PAN communication links 10, Para. 34, FIG. 1).
Teague teaches transmit location information (gateway wristband 1 is configured to communicate a patient ID or a wristband ID. The patient or wristband ID may be communicated to the hospital network 4 periodically so as to indicate the location of the patient within the network, Para. 35, FIG. 1) according to a second wireless protocol different than the first wireless protocol (translate data from the PAN protocol format to the WLAN protocol format, Para. 29. A WLAN transceiver for establishing wide-area wireless communications links 12 with a base station 5 of a hospital network 4, Para. 34, FIG. 1).
Teague teaches relay network hubs (router 19, Para. 37, FIGS. 1, 2, 8) configured to form a wide area network (data network signals 12 from/to a WLAN or WWAN base station antenna 5, Para. 37, FIGS. 1, 2, 8) with the player network hub (gateway wristband 1 including a WLAN or WWAN transceiver, Para. 37, FIGS. 1, 2, 8) and a master network hub (network server 22, Para. 37, FIGS. 1, 2, 8) by communicating, at least in part, according to the second wireless protocol (gateway wristband 1 including a WLAN or WWAN transceiver for transmitting and receiving data network signals 12 from/to a WLAN or WWAN base station antenna 5, Para. 37, FIGS. 1, 2, 8).
Teague teaches wherein the peripheral devices (miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 34, FIG. 1) are configured to be associated with the player (miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d on patients, Para. 36, FIG. 1. Patient data from miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 49, FIGS. 1, 8).
Teague teaches wherein at least one of the peripheral devices (miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 49, FIGS. 1, 8) is configured to sense physiologic data regarding the player (miniaturized electronic medical sensors which can be placed on or within a patient to record and report any of variety of medically important parameters, Para. 26. Patient data from miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 49, FIGS. 1, 8) and transmit the data to the player network hub (gateway wristband 1 is configured to collect and store patient data from miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 49, FIGS. 1, 8) according to the first wireless protocol (gateway wristband 1 to receive sensor data from the miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d in a first communication protocol, such as PAN communication links 10, Para. 34, FIG. 1).
Teague, although providing an implicit teaching, fails to explicitly teach relay network hubs configured to form a wide area network with the player network hub and a master network hub by communicating, at least in part, according to the second wireless protocol, and Teague fails to teach wherein the relay network hubs are configured to receive the location information from the player network hub and wherein at least one of the relay network hubs or the master network hub are configured to determine a location of the player network hub based on the location information.
Chien teaches relay network hubs configured to form a wide area network with the player network hub (The ID 303 transmitted by the tag 301 is received by several relays, for example, relays 305, 307 and 309, Col. 10, lines 2-3, FIG. 2A).
Chien teaches and a master network hub (base station 313, Col. 10, lines 10-12, FIG. 2A) by communicating, at least in part, according to the second wireless protocol (Once the position of the tag 301 was determined, it could be transmitted 311 to the base station 313, Col. 10, lines 10-12, FIG. 2A).
Chien teaches wherein the relay network hubs are configured to receive the location information from the player network hub (Each relay 305, 307 and 309 stores the time that it received the ID 303 transmitted from the tag 301, Col. 10, lines 4-5, FIG. 2A) and wherein at least one of the relay network hubs or the master network hub are configured to determine a location of the player network hub based on the location information (By comparing the reception times, the relays can ascertain the relative location of the tag with respect to the location of the relays 305, then 307 and 309. The location of the tag 301 can be computed, Col. 10, lines 5-10, FIG. 2A).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Chien with the teachings of Teague since Chien provides a technique for position determining computations or functions (see Chien, column 3, lines 6-10), which can be introduced in the system of Teague to permit more precise location indications concerning gateway wristbands.
Teague in view of Chien fails to teach wherein the relay network hubs each have a relative known location with respect to a reference and wherein the at least one of the relay network hubs or the master network hub are configured to determine a location of the player network hub according to the reference; wherein the reference is a field of play and wherein the player network hub is configured to be associated with a player of an athletic event on the field of play, and although Teague in view of Chien teaches the player, Teague in view of Chien fails to teach the athletic performance of the player.
Cana teaches wherein the relay network hubs (tracking and control unit 14 which may be connected to other tracking and control units 16, Para. 23, FIG. 1) each have a relative known location (The tracking and control unit includes a locating device, and from the location information from a selected TAG determines angular displacement from a reference and distance from the tracking and control unit, Para. 5. Determine the location of the selected TAG and the location of the base unit, such as to which a video camera is mounted, Para. 36, FIG. 13) with respect to a reference (determines angular displacement from a reference and distance from the tracking and control unit, Para. 5. Recording positions in a sports field of play. Known locations could include selected distance from the corners of the rectangular field of play. Determine the relative location of a TAG of various transmitters adjacent the field of play, Para. 44).
Cana teaches wherein the at least one of the relay network hubs or the master network hub are configured to determine a location of the player network hub according to the reference (In step 328, a wireless signal is received from the selected TAG and from TAG associated with the base unit to determine the location of the selected TAG and the location of the base unit, such as to which a video camera is mounted. In step 330, the target and control unit performs direction and distance calculations from the location information received from the TAG selected for targeting and from location information from the TAG associated with the base unit, Para. 36, FIG. 13).
Cana teaches wherein the reference is a field of play (determines angular displacement from a reference and distance from the tracking and control unit, Para. 5. Recording positions in a sports field of play. Known locations could include selected distance from the corners of the rectangular field of play, Para. 44) and wherein the player network hub is configured to be associated with a player of an athletic event on the field of play (a TAG worn by a particular player in a sports field of play, Para. 33, FIG. 10. Determine the relative location of a TAG of various transmitters adjacent the field of play, Para. 44).
Cana teaches the athletic performance of the player (Processor 114 applies various algorithms to determine the speed for a TAG being tracked, Para. 26, FIGS. 4, 5. The processor 264 applies an algorithm for determining the speed relating to the various TAGs polled, Para. 33, FIG. 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Cana with the teachings of Teague in view of Chien since Cana provides a technique for multi-axis control of a fixed or moving device based on a wireless tracking location of one or many target devices (see Cana, paragraph [0004]), which can be introduced in the system of Teague in view of Chien to permit medical information tracking of participants in a group activity involving potential injuries occurring within a certain area of activity.
In regard to Claim 2, as presented in the rejection of Claim 1, Teague in view of Chien and Cana teaches the player network hub.
Teague in view of Chien fails to teach the player network hub is configured to be secured with respect to a player involved in an athletic activity.
Cana teaches the player network hub is configured to be secured with respect to a player involved in an athletic activity (determines angular displacement from a reference and distance from the tracking and control unit, Para. 5. A TAG worn by a particular player in a sports field of play, Para. 33, FIG. 10. Recording positions in a sports field of play. Known locations could include selected distance from the corners of the rectangular field of play. Determine the relative location of a TAG of various transmitters adjacent the field of play, Para. 44).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Cana with the teachings of Teague in view of Chien since Cana provides a technique for multi-axis control of a fixed or moving device based on a wireless tracking location of one or many target devices (see Cana, paragraph [0004]), which can be introduced in the system of Teague in view of Chien to permit medical information tracking of participants in a group activity involving potential injuries occurring within a certain area of activity.
In regard to Claim 3, Teague teaches the player network hub (gateway wristband 1, Para. 34, FIG. 1) is configured to receive data transmitted form the peripheral devices (gateway wristband 1 to receive sensor data from the miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 34, FIG. 1) and transmit the data to at least one of the relay network hubs (router 19, Para. 37, FIGS. 1, 2, 8).
In regard to Claim 7, Teague teaches the player network hub (gateway wristband 1, Para. 34, FIG. 1) is integrated in at least one of apparel or an article configured to be worn by the player (patients are provided with a plastic wristband, Para. 2. A patient identifier wristband contains a wireless communication gateway device, which is referred to herein as a "gateway wristband.", Para. 4, FIG. 1).
In regard to Claim 8, Teague teaches the player network hub (gateway wristband 1, Para. 34, FIG. 1) is configured to transit the data to at least one of the relay network hubs (router 19, Para. 37, FIGS. 1, 2, 8); the at least one relay network hubs (router 19, Para. 37, FIGS. 1, 2, 8) are configured to transmit the data regarding the player to the master network hub (network server 22, Para. 37, FIGS. 1, 2, 8); and the master network hub (network server 22, Para. 37, FIGS. 1, 2, 8) is configured to at least one of determine analytics based on the data and cause the data to be presented on a user interface (computers, such a laptop computer 30, can be coupled to the hospital network 4 via the Internet 24 by way of their own Internet connection 28, Para. 38, FIG. 2).
In regard to Claim 9, as presented in the rejection of Claim 1, Teague teaches the relay network hubs.
Teague fails to teach the relay network hubs comprise: an antenna configured to communicate according to the second wireless protocol; and a location circuit configured to determine the location information.
Chien teaches the relay network hubs comprise: an antenna configured to communicate according to the second wireless protocol (The relay 305 of FIG. 2D includes a receiver 355 for receiving tag transmissions 351 from RF tags 301 and also for receiving relay transmissions 353 from other relay transmitters. The antenna 365, could be used for all radio transmissions and receptions, Col. 11, lines 12-23, FIG. 2D); and a location circuit configured to determine the location information (the relays can ascertain the relative location of the tag with respect to the location of the relays 305, then 307 and 309, Col. 10, lines 5-8, FIG. 2D).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Chien with the teachings of Teague since Chien provides a technique for position determining computations or functions (see Chien, column 3, lines 6-10), which can be introduced in the system of Teague to permit more precise location indications concerning gateway wristbands.
In regard to Claim 10, as presented in the rejection of Claim 1, Teague teaches the player network hub.
Teague in view of Chien fails to teach location information is based on a distance between the player network hub and the relay network hub, wherein the at least one of the relay network hubs or the master network hub are configured to determine the location of the player network hub by triangulating the distance information determined by the location circuit of multiple ones of the relay network hubs.
Cana teaches location information is based on a distance between the player network hub and the relay network hub, wherein the at least one of the relay network hubs or the master network hub are configured to determine the location of the player network hub by triangulating the distance information determined by the location circuit of multiple ones of the relay network hubs (triangulation calculations may be determined from sonic signals received from the TAG 192 by the transducers 200 and 202, Para. 31, FIGS. 5, 8. A signal comparator 252 compare sonic signals received by the sonic transducers 246 and 248, preferably transmitted as a burst from a sonic tag, and determines the relative signal strength and/or phase of the sonic signals received for use in triangulation calculations for determining a location of a sonic TAG relative to the tracking and control unit 236, Para. 33, FIG. 5, 8, 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Cana with the teachings of Teague in view of Chien since Cana provides a technique for multi-axis control of a fixed or moving device based on a wireless tracking location of one or many target devices (see Cana, paragraph [0004]), which can be introduced in the system of Teague in view of Chien to permit medical information tracking of participants in a group activity involving potential injuries occurring within a certain area of activity.
In regard to Claim 11, as presented in the rejection of Claim 1, Teague teaches the relay network hubs.
Teague fails to teach the relay network hubs each further comprise a wireless communication tag comprising the antenna, the location circuit, a data port, and a microcontroller configured to manage the location circuit and data reception and transmission via the data port.
Chien teaches the relay network hubs each further comprise a wireless communication tag comprising the antenna, the location circuit, a data port, and a microcontroller configured to manage the location circuit and data reception and transmission via the data port (the relays can ascertain the relative location of the tag with respect to the location of the relays 305, then 307 and 309, Col. 10, lines 5-8, FIG. 2D. The relay 305 of FIG. 2D includes a receiver 355 for receiving tag transmissions 351 from RF tags 301 and also for receiving relay transmissions 353 from other relay transmitters. To communicate the tag 305. The antenna 365, could be used for all radio transmissions and receptions, Col. 11, lines 12-23, FIG. 2D).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Chien with the teachings of Teague since Chien provides a technique for position determining computations or functions (see Chien, column 3, lines 6-10), which can be introduced in the system of Teague to permit more precise location indications concerning gateway wristbands.
In regard to Claim 12, as presented in the rejection of Claim 1, Teague teaches the player network hub.
Teague in view of Chien fails to teach the player network hub comprises the wireless communication tag, wherein the location circuit is configured to transmit a data packet to the relay network hubs via the antenna, and wherein the location circuit of the relay network hub is configured to determine a distance between the player network hub and the relay network hub based on the data packet.
Cana teaches the player network hub comprises the wireless communication tag, wherein the location circuit is configured to transmit a data packet to the relay network hubs via the antenna, and wherein the location circuit of the relay network hub is configured to determine a distance between the player network hub and the relay network hub based on the data packet (The tracking and control unit includes a locating device, and from the location information from a selected TAG determines angular displacement from a reference and distance from the tracking and control unit, Para. 5. Triangulation calculations may be determined from sonic signals received from the TAG 192 by the transducers 200 and 202, Para. 31, FIGS. 5, 8. A signal comparator 252 compare sonic signals received by the sonic transducers 246 and 248, preferably transmitted as a burst from a sonic tag, and determines the relative signal strength and/or phase of the sonic signals received for use in triangulation calculations for determining a location of a sonic TAG relative to the tracking and control unit 236, Para. 33, FIG. 5, 8, 10. Determine the location of the selected TAG and the location of the base unit, such as to which a video camera is mounted, Para. 36, FIG. 13).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Cana with the teachings of Teague in view of Chien since Cana provides a technique for multi-axis control of a fixed or moving device based on a wireless tracking location of one or many target devices (see Cana, paragraph [0004]), which can be introduced in the system of Teague in view of Chien to permit medical information tracking of participants in a group activity involving potential injuries occurring within a certain area of activity.
In regard to Claim 13, Teague teaches the player network hub comprises: a body area network hub configured to communicate according to the first wireless protocol, wherein the body area network hub comprises an antenna and a communication module configured to communicate according to the first wireless protocol (gateway wristband 1 to receive sensor data from the miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d in a first communication protocol, such as PAN communication links 10, Para. 34, FIG. 1); and a wireless communication tag, coupled to the body area network hub (a laptop 30, may also be configured with both a PAN transceiver, to receive data from miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, and with a WLAN or WWAN transceiver to establish network communication links 12, Para. 39, FIG. 2).
Teague fails to teach a wireless communication tag configured to communicate according to the second wireless protocol, wherein the wireless communication tag comprises: a location circuit configured to generate a location packet; an antenna configured to transmit the location packet to at least some of the relay network hubs according to the second wireless protocol.
Cana teaches a wireless communication tag configured to communicate according to the second wireless protocol, wherein the wireless communication tag comprises: a location circuit configured to generate a location packet; an antenna configured to transmit the location packet to at least some of the relay network hubs according to the second wireless protocol (A transmitter and receiver section 66 are included in the TAG 54, and includes an antenna 68 connected to the receiver 72 and the transmitter 70, Para. 25, FIG. 3. In step 328, a wireless signal is received from the selected TAG and from TAG associated with the base unit to determine the location of the selected TAG and the location of the base unit, such as to which a video camera is mounted. In step 330, the target and control unit performs direction and distance calculations from the location information received from the TAG selected for targeting and from location information from the TAG associated with the base unit, Para. 36, FIG. 13).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Cana with the teachings of Teague in view of Chien since Cana provides a technique for multi-axis control of a fixed or moving device based on a wireless tracking location of one or many target devices (see Cana, paragraph [0004]), which can be introduced in the system of Teague in view of Chien to permit medical information tracking of participants in a group activity involving potential injuries occurring within a certain area of activity.
In regard to Claim 14, Teague teaches A method, comprising: forming, with a player network hub (gateway wristband 1, Para. 34, FIG. 1) a body area network (The gateway wristband may serve as a wireless gateway for a wireless personal area network (PAN), Para. 5) with peripheral devices (miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 34, FIG. 1) by communicating wirelessly according to a first wireless protocol (gateway wristband 1 to receive sensor data from the miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d in a first communication protocol, such as PAN communication links 10, Para. 34, FIG. 1).
Teague teaches transmitting, with the player network hub, location information (gateway wristband 1 is configured to communicate a patient ID or a wristband ID. The patient or wristband ID may be communicated to the hospital network 4 periodically so as to indicate the location of the patient within the network, Para. 35, FIG. 1) according to a second wireless protocol different than the first wireless protocol (translate data from the PAN protocol format to the WLAN protocol format, Para. 29. A WLAN transceiver for establishing wide-area wireless communications links 12 with a base station 5 of a hospital network 4, Para. 34, FIG. 1).
Teague teaches forming, with relay network hubs (router 19, Para. 37, FIGS. 1, 2, 8), a wide area network (data network signals 12 from/to a WLAN or WWAN base station antenna 5, Para. 37, FIGS. 1, 2, 8) with the player network hub (gateway wristband 1 including a WLAN or WWAN transceiver, Para. 37, FIGS. 1, 2, 8) and a master network hub (network server 22, Para. 37, FIGS. 1, 2, 8) by communicating, at least in part, according to the second wireless protocol (gateway wristband 1 including a WLAN or WWAN transceiver for transmitting and receiving data network signals 12 from/to a WLAN or WWAN base station antenna 5, Para. 37, FIGS. 1, 2, 8).
Teague teaches wherein the peripheral devices (miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 34, FIG. 1) are configured to be associated with the player (miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d on patients, Para. 36, FIG. 1. Patient data from miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 49, FIGS. 1, 8).
Teague teaches wherein at least one of the peripheral devices (miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 49, FIGS. 1, 8) is configured to sense physiologic data regarding the player (miniaturized electronic medical sensors which can be placed on or within a patient to record and report any of variety of medically important parameters, Para. 26. Patient data from miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 49, FIGS. 1, 8) and transmit the data to the player network hub (gateway wristband 1 is configured to collect and store patient data from miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 49, FIGS. 1, 8) according to the first wireless protocol (gateway wristband 1 to receive sensor data from the miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d in a first communication protocol, such as PAN communication links 10, Para. 34, FIG. 1).
Teague, although providing an implicit teaching, fails to explicitly teach forming, with relay network hubs, a wide area network with the player network hub and a master network hub by communicating, at least in part, according to the second wireless protocol, and Teague fails to teach wherein the relay network hubs are configured to receive the location information from the player network hub and wherein at least one of the relay network hubs or the master network hub are configured to determine a location of the player network hub based on the location information.
Chien teaches forming, with relay network hubs, a wide area network with the player network hub (The ID 303 transmitted by the tag 301 is received by several relays, for example, relays 305, 307 and 309, Col. 10, lines 2-3, FIG. 2A).
Chien teaches and a master network hub (base station 313, Col. 10, lines 10-12, FIG. 2A) by communicating, at least in part, according to the second wireless protocol (Once the position of the tag 301 was determined, it could be transmitted 311 to the base station 313, Col. 10, lines 10-12, FIG. 2A).
Chien teaches wherein the relay network hubs are configured to receive the location information from the player network hub (Each relay 305, 307 and 309 stores the time that it received the ID 303 transmitted from the tag 301, Col. 10, lines 4-5, FIG. 2A) and wherein at least one of the relay network hubs or the master network hub are configured to determine a location of the player network hub based on the location information (By comparing the reception times, the relays can ascertain the relative location of the tag with respect to the location of the relays 305, then 307 and 309. The location of the tag 301 can be computed, Col. 10, lines 5-10, FIG. 2A).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Chien with the teachings of Teague since Chien provides a technique for position determining computations or functions (see Chien, column 3, lines 6-10), which can be introduced in the system of Teague to permit more precise location indications concerning gateway wristbands.
Teague in view of Chien fails to teach determining, with at least one of the relay network hubs or the master network hub, a location of the player network hub according to a relative known location of the relay network hubs with respect to a reference; wherein the reference is a field of play and wherein the player network hub is configured to be associated with a player of an athletic event on the field of play, and although Teague in view of Chien teaches the player, Teague in view of Chien fails to teach the athletic performance of the player.
Cana teaches determining, with at least one of the relay network hubs or the master network hub, a location of the player network hub (In step 328, a wireless signal is received from the selected TAG and from TAG associated with the base unit to determine the location of the selected TAG and the location of the base unit, such as to which a video camera is mounted. In step 330, the target and control unit performs direction and distance calculations from the location information received from the TAG selected for targeting and from location information from the TAG associated with the base unit, Para. 36, FIG. 13) according to a relative known location (The tracking and control unit includes a locating device, and from the location information from a selected TAG determines angular displacement from a reference and distance from the tracking and control unit, Para. 5. Determine the location of the selected TAG and the location of the base unit, such as to which a video camera is mounted, Para. 36, FIG. 13) of the relay network hubs (tracking and control unit 14 which may be connected to other tracking and control units 16, Para. 23, FIG. 1) with respect to a reference (determines angular displacement from a reference and distance from the tracking and control unit, Para. 5. Recording positions in a sports field of play. Known locations could include selected distance from the corners of the rectangular field of play. Determine the relative location of a TAG of various transmitters adjacent the field of play, Para. 44).
Cana teaches wherein the reference is a field of play (determines angular displacement from a reference and distance from the tracking and control unit, Para. 5. Recording positions in a sports field of play. Known locations could include selected distance from the corners of the rectangular field of play, Para. 44) and wherein the player network hub is configured to be associated with a player of an athletic event on the field of play (a TAG worn by a particular player in a sports field of play, Para. 33, FIG. 10. Determine the relative location of a TAG of various transmitters adjacent the field of play, Para. 44).
Cana teaches the athletic performance of the player (Processor 114 applies various algorithms to determine the speed for a TAG being tracked, Para. 26, FIGS. 4, 5. The processor 264 applies an algorithm for determining the speed relating to the various TAGs polled, Para. 33, FIG. 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Cana with the teachings of Teague in view of Chien since Cana provides a technique for multi-axis control of a fixed or moving device based on a wireless tracking location of one or many target devices (see Cana, paragraph [0004]), which can be introduced in the system of Teague in view of Chien to permit medical information tracking of participants in a group activity involving potential injuries occurring within a certain area of activity.
In regard to Claim 15, as presented in the rejection of Claim 14, Teague in view of Chien and Cana teaches the player network hub.
Teague in view of Chien fails to teach securing the player network hub with respect to a player involved in an athletic activity.
Cana teaches securing the player network hub with respect to a player involved in an athletic activity (determines angular displacement from a reference and distance from the tracking and control unit, Para. 5. A TAG worn by a particular player in a sports field of play, Para. 33, FIG. 10. Recording positions in a sports field of play. Known locations could include selected distance from the corners of the rectangular field of play. Determine the relative location of a TAG of various transmitters adjacent the field of play, Para. 44).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Cana with the teachings of Teague in view of Chien since Cana provides a technique for multi-axis control of a fixed or moving device based on a wireless tracking location of one or many target devices (see Cana, paragraph [0004]), which can be introduced in the system of Teague in view of Chien to permit medical information tracking of participants in a group activity involving potential injuries occurring within a certain area of activity.
In regard to Claim 16, Teague teaches receiving, with the player network hub (gateway wristband 1, Para. 34, FIG. 1), data transmitted form the peripheral devices (gateway wristband 1 to receive sensor data from the miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 34, FIG. 1); and transmitting the data to at least one of the relay network hubs (router 19, Para. 37, FIGS. 1, 2, 8).
In regard to Claim 20, Teague teaches the player network hub (gateway wristband 1, Para. 34, FIG. 1) is integrated in at least one of apparel or an article worn by the player (patients are provided with a plastic wristband, Para. 2. A patient identifier wristband contains a wireless communication gateway device, which is referred to herein as a "gateway wristband.", Para. 4, FIG. 1).
In regard to Claim 21, as presented in the rejection of Claim 14, Teague in view of Chien and Cana teaches the player network hub.
Teague in view of Chien fails to teach the reference is a field of play and wherein the player network hub is associated with a player of an athletic event on the field of play.
Cana teaches the reference is a field of play (determines angular displacement from a reference and distance from the tracking and control unit, Para. 5. Recording positions in a sports field of play. Known locations could include selected distance from the corners of the rectangular field of play, Para. 44) and wherein the player network hub is associated with a player of an athletic event on the field of play (a TAG worn by a particular player in a sports field of play, Para. 33, FIG. 10. Determine the relative location of a TAG of various transmitters adjacent the field of play, Para. 44).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Cana with the teachings of Teague in view of Chien since Cana provides a technique for multi-axis control of a fixed or moving device based on a wireless tracking location of one or many target devices (see Cana, paragraph [0004]), which can be introduced in the system of Teague in view of Chien to permit medical information tracking of participants in a group activity involving potential injuries occurring within a certain area of activity.
In regard to Claim 22, Teague teaches the peripheral devices are associated with the player and wherein at least one of the peripheral devices senses data regarding the player and transmits the data to the player network hubs according to the first wireless protocol (gateway wristband 1 to receive sensor data from the miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 34, FIG. 1).
In regard to Claim 23, Teague teaches transmitting, with the player network hub (gateway wristband 1, Para. 34, FIG. 1), the data to at least one of the relay network hubs (router 19, Para. 37, FIGS. 1, 2, 8); transmitting, with the at least one relay network hub (router 19, Para. 37, FIGS. 1, 2, 8), the data regarding the player to the master network hub (network server 22, Para. 37, FIGS. 1, 2, 8); determining, with the master network hub (network server 22, Para. 37, FIGS. 1, 2, 8), analytics based on the data; and causing the data to be presented on a user interface (computers, such a laptop computer 30, can be coupled to the hospital network 4 via the Internet 24 by way of their own Internet connection 28, Para. 38, FIG. 2).
In regard to Claim 24, as presented in the rejection of Claim 14, Teague teaches the relay network hubs.
Teague fails to teach the relay network hubs comprise: an antenna configured to communicate according to the second wireless protocol; and a location circuit configured to determine the location information.
Chien teaches the relay network hubs comprise: an antenna configured to communicate according to the second wireless protocol (The relay 305 of FIG. 2D includes a receiver 355 for receiving tag transmissions 351 from RF tags 301 and also for receiving relay transmissions 353 from other relay transmitters. The antenna 365, could be used for all radio transmissions and receptions, Col. 11, lines 12-23, FIG. 2D); and a location circuit configured to determine the location information (the relays can ascertain the relative location of the tag with respect to the location of the relays 305, then 307 and 309, Col. 10, lines 5-8, FIG. 2D).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Chien with the teachings of Teague since Chien provides a technique for position determining computations or functions (see Chien, column 3, lines 6-10), which can be introduced in the system of Teague to permit more precise location indications concerning gateway wristbands.
In regard to Claim 25, as presented in the rejection of Claim 14, Teague teaches the player network hub.
Teague in view of Chien fails to teach location information is based on a distance between the player network hub and the relay network hub, and further comprising: determining, with the at least one of the relay network hubs or the master network hub, the location of the player network hub by triangulating the distance information determined by the location circuit of multiple ones of the relay network hubs.
Cana teaches location information is based on a distance between the player network hub and the relay network hub, and further comprising: determining, with the at least one of the relay network hubs or the master network hub, the location of the player network hub by triangulating the distance information determined by the location circuit of multiple ones of the relay network hubs (triangulation calculations may be determined from sonic signals received from the TAG 192 by the transducers 200 and 202, Para. 31, FIGS. 5, 8. A signal comparator 252 compare sonic signals received by the sonic transducers 246 and 248, preferably transmitted as a burst from a sonic tag, and determines the relative signal strength and/or phase of the sonic signals received for use in triangulation calculations for determining a location of a sonic TAG relative to the tracking and control unit 236, Para. 33, FIG. 5, 8, 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Cana with the teachings of Teague in view of Chien since Cana provides a technique for multi-axis control of a fixed or moving device based on a wireless tracking location of one or many target devices (see Cana, paragraph [0004]), which can be introduced in the system of Teague in view of Chien to permit medical information tracking of participants in a group activity involving potential injuries occurring within a certain area of activity.
In regard to Claim 26, as presented in the rejection of Claim 14, Teague teaches the relay network hubs.
Teague fails to teach the relay network hubs each further comprise a wireless communication tag comprising the antenna, the location circuit, a data port, and a microcontroller configured to manage the location circuit and data reception and transmission via the data port.
Chien teaches the relay network hubs each further comprise a wireless communication tag comprising the antenna, the location circuit, a data port, and a microcontroller configured to manage the location circuit and data reception and transmission via the data port (the relays can ascertain the relative location of the tag with respect to the location of the relays 305, then 307 and 309, Col. 10, lines 5-8, FIG. 2D. The relay 305 of FIG. 2D includes a receiver 355 for receiving tag transmissions 351 from RF tags 301 and also for receiving relay transmissions 353 from other relay transmitters. To communicate the tag 305. The antenna 365, could be used for all radio transmissions and receptions, Col. 11, lines 12-23, FIG. 2D).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Chien with the teachings of Teague since Chien provides a technique for position determining computations or functions (see Chien, column 3, lines 6-10), which can be introduced in the system of Teague to permit more precise location indications concerning gateway wristbands.
In regard to Claim 27, as presented in the rejection of Claim 14, Teague teaches the player network hub.
Teague in view of Chien fails to teach the player network hub comprises the wireless communication tag, and further comprising: transmitting, with the location circuit, a data packet to the relay network hubs via the antenna; and determining, with the location circuit of the relay network hub, a distance between the player network hub and the relay network hub based on the data packet.
Cana teaches the player network hub comprises the wireless communication tag, and further comprising: transmitting, with the location circuit, a data packet to the relay network hubs via the antenna; and determining, with the location circuit of the relay network hub, a distance between the player network hub and the relay network hub based on the data packet (The tracking and control unit includes a locating device, and from the location information from a selected TAG determines angular displacement from a reference and distance from the tracking and control unit, Para. 5. Triangulation calculations may be determined from sonic signals received from the TAG 192 by the transducers 200 and 202, Para. 31, FIGS. 5, 8. A signal comparator 252 compare sonic signals received by the sonic transducers 246 and 248, preferably transmitted as a burst from a sonic tag, and determines the relative signal strength and/or phase of the sonic signals received for use in triangulation calculations for determining a location of a sonic TAG relative to the tracking and control unit 236, Para. 33, FIG. 5, 8, 10. Determine the location of the selected TAG and the location of the base unit, such as to which a video camera is mounted, Para. 36, FIG. 13).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Cana with the teachings of Teague in view of Chien since Cana provides a technique for multi-axis control of a fixed or moving device based on a wireless tracking location of one or many target devices (see Cana, paragraph [0004]), which can be introduced in the system of Teague in view of Chien to permit medical information tracking of participants in a group activity involving potential injuries occurring within a certain area of activity.
In regard to Claim 28, Teague teaches the player network hub comprises: communicating, with a body area network hub of the player network hub, according to the first wireless protocol, wherein the body area network hub comprises an antenna and a communication module configured to communicate according to the first wireless protocol (gateway wristband 1 to receive sensor data from the miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d in a first communication protocol, such as PAN communication links 10, Para. 34, FIG. 1); and communicating, with a wireless communication tag of the player network hub (a laptop 30, may also be configured with both a PAN transceiver, to receive data from miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, and with a WLAN or WWAN transceiver to establish network communication links 12, Para. 39, FIG. 2).
Teague fails to teach communicating according to the second wireless protocol; wherein the wireless communication tag comprises: generating, with a location circuit of the wireless communication tag, a location packet; and transmitting, with an antenna of the wireless communication tag, the location packet to at least some of the relay network hubs according to the second wireless protocol.
Cana teaches communicating according to the second wireless protocol; wherein the wireless communication tag comprises: generating, with a location circuit of the wireless communication tag, a location packet; and transmitting, with an antenna of the wireless communication tag, the location packet to at least some of the relay network hubs according to the second wireless protocol (A transmitter and receiver section 66 are included in the TAG 54, and includes an antenna 68 connected to the receiver 72 and the transmitter 70, Para. 25, FIG. 3. In step 328, a wireless signal is received from the selected TAG and from TAG associated with the base unit to determine the location of the selected TAG and the location of the base unit, such as to which a video camera is mounted. In step 330, the target and control unit performs direction and distance calculations from the location information received from the TAG selected for targeting and from location information from the TAG associated with the base unit, Para. 36, FIG. 13).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Cana with the teachings of Teague in view of Chien since Cana provides a technique for multi-axis control of a fixed or moving device based on a wireless tracking location of one or many target devices (see Cana, paragraph [0004]), which can be introduced in the system of Teague in view of Chien to permit medical information tracking of participants in a group activity involving potential injuries occurring within a certain area of activity.
Claim(s) 4-6 and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Teague in view of Chien, Cana, and further in view of St. Laurent et al. (Pub. No.: US 20130211270 A1), hereafter referred to as St. Laurent.
In regard to Claim 4, Teague teaches the data is physiologic data regarding the player (miniaturized electronic medical sensors which can be placed on or within a patient to record and report any of variety of medically important parameters, Para. 26. Patient data from miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 49, FIGS. 1, 8).
Although Teague teaches the player, Teague fails to teach the athletic performance of the player includes at least one of moisture or sweat of the player.
St. Laurent teaches the athletic performance of the player includes at least one of moisture (One or more monitoring devices can be given, for example, to one or more athletes competing in an activity on an athletic field, Para. 28. Number of biometric sensors that measure vital signs such as moisture level, Para. 32. The biometric sensor 106 comprises a moisture sensor, Para. 36, FIG. 1. When other sensors are included in the biometric sensor 106, other data can be reported in the same way, including but not limited to, moisture content, Para. 41. In FIG. 2, the biometric sensor 206 includes not only acceleration sensors, but also a moisture sensor 222, Para. 42, FIG. 2) or sweat of the player (one or more athletes, Para. 28).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of St. Laurent with the teachings of Teague in view of Chien and Cana since St. Laurent provides a technique for presenting location information along with biometric information (see St. Laurent, paragraphs [0093—0095]), which can be introduced in the system of Teague in view of Chien and Cana to permit detailed information of gateway wristband wearers to be communicated and presented to appropriate personnel.
In regard to Claim 5, as presented in the rejection of Claim 1, Teague in view of Chien and Cana teach the peripheral devices.
Teague in view of Chien and Cana fails to teach the data is indicative of a proximity of an auxiliary device to one of the peripheral devices.
St. Laurent teaches the data is indicative of a proximity of an auxiliary device to one of the peripheral devices (At step 1503 and step 1505 triangulation could be performed by generating a series of hyperboloids modeling the distances between each radio transceiver and each communication device to achieve a fine location estimate, Para. 131, FIGS. 15, 16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of St. Laurent with the teachings of Teague in view of Chien and Cana since St. Laurent provides a technique for presenting location information along with biometric information (see St. Laurent, paragraphs [0093—0095]), which can be introduced in the system of Teague in view of Chien and Cana to permit detailed information of gateway wristband wearers to be communicated and presented to appropriate personnel.
In regard to Claim 6, as presented in the rejection of Claim 1, Teague in view of Chien and Cana teach the system.
Teague in view of Chien fails to teach equipment utilized in the athletic activity including at least one of a ball, a bat, or a golf club.
Cana teaches equipment utilized in the athletic activity including at least one of a ball (The proximity TAG may be mounted to a game ball, such as for basketball, football and soccer, or a hockey puck, and such, Para. 38, 44), a bat, or a golf club.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Cana with the teachings of Teague in view of Chien since Cana provides a technique for multi-axis control of a fixed or moving device based on a wireless tracking location of one or many target devices (see Cana, paragraph [0004]), which can be introduced in the system of Teague in view of Chien to permit medical information tracking of participants in a group activity involving potential injuries occurring within a certain area of activity.
Although Teague in view of Chien and Cana teaches equipment, Teague in view of Chien and Cana fails to teach the auxiliary device is equipment.
St. Laurent teaches the auxiliary device is equipment utilized in the athletic activity (biometric sensor 106 comprises a linear acceleration sensor, a rotational acceleration sensor, or a combination thereof. A radio frequency transceiver located near a user wearing the mouth guard 101, Para. 37, 41-43, FIGS. 1-4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of St. Laurent with the teachings of Teague in view of Chien and Cana since St. Laurent provides a technique for presenting location information along with biometric information (see St. Laurent, paragraphs [0093—0095]), which can be introduced in the system of Teague in view of Chien and Cana to permit detailed information of gateway wristband wearers to be communicated and presented to appropriate personnel.
In regard to Claim 17, Teague teaches the data is physiologic data regarding the player (miniaturized electronic medical sensors which can be placed on or within a patient to record and report any of variety of medically important parameters, Para. 26. Patient data from miniaturized electronic medical sensors 2a-2d, Para. 49, FIGS. 1, 8).
Although Teague teaches the player, Teague fails to teach the athletic performance of the player includes at least one of moisture or sweat of the player.
St. Laurent teaches the athletic performance of the player includes at least one of moisture (One or more monitoring devices can be given, for example, to one or more athletes competing in an activity on an athletic field, Para. 28. Number of biometric sensors that measure vital signs such as moisture level, Para. 32. The biometric sensor 106 comprises a moisture sensor, Para. 36, FIG. 1. When other sensors are included in the biometric sensor 106, other data can be reported in the same way, including but not limited to, moisture content, Para. 41. In FIG. 2, the biometric sensor 206 includes not only acceleration sensors, but also a moisture sensor 222, Para. 42, FIG. 2) or sweat of the player (one or more athletes, Para. 28).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of St. Laurent with the teachings of Teague in view of Chien and Cana since St. Laurent provides a technique for presenting location information along with biometric information (see St. Laurent, paragraphs [0093—0095]), which can be introduced in the system of Teague in view of Chien and Cana to permit detailed information of gateway wristband wearers to be communicated and presented to appropriate personnel.
In regard to Claim 18, as presented in the rejection of Claim 14, Teague in view of Chien and Cana teach the peripheral devices.
Teague in view of Chien and Cana fails to teach the data is indicative of a proximity of an auxiliary device to one of the peripheral devices.
St. Laurent teaches the data is indicative of a proximity of an auxiliary device to one of the peripheral devices (At step 1503 and step 1505 triangulation could be performed by generating a series of hyperboloids modeling the distances between each radio transceiver and each communication device to achieve a fine location estimate, Para. 131, FIGS. 15, 16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of St. Laurent with the teachings of Teague in view of Chien and Cana since St. Laurent provides a technique for presenting location information along with biometric information (see St. Laurent, paragraphs [0093—0095]), which can be introduced in the system of Teague in view of Chien and Cana to permit detailed information of gateway wristband wearers to be communicated and presented to appropriate personnel.
In regard to Claim 19, as presented in the rejection of Claim 14, Teague in view of Chien and Cana teach the system.
Teague in view of Chien fails to teach equipment utilized in the athletic activity including at least one of a ball, a bat, or a golf club.
Cana teaches equipment utilized in the athletic activity including at least one of a ball (The proximity TAG may be mounted to a game ball, such as for basketball, football and soccer, or a hockey puck, and such, Para. 38, 44), a bat, or a golf club.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Cana with the teachings of Teague in view of Chien since Cana provides a technique for multi-axis control of a fixed or moving device based on a wireless tracking location of one or many target devices (see Cana, paragraph [0004]), which can be introduced in the system of Teague in view of Chien to permit medical information tracking of participants in a group activity involving potential injuries occurring within a certain area of activity.
Although Teague in view of Chien and Cana teaches equipment, Teague in view of Chien and Cana fails to teach the auxiliary device is equipment.
St. Laurent teaches the auxiliary device is equipment utilized in the athletic activity (biometric sensor 106 comprises a linear acceleration sensor, a rotational acceleration sensor, or a combination thereof. A radio frequency transceiver located near a user wearing the mouth guard 101, Para. 37, 41-43, FIGS. 1-4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of St. Laurent with the teachings of Teague in view of Chien and Cana since St. Laurent provides a technique for presenting location information along with biometric information (see St. Laurent, paragraphs [0093—0095]), which can be introduced in the system of Teague in view of Chien and Cana to permit detailed information of gateway wristband wearers to be communicated and presented to appropriate personnel.
Response to Arguments
I. New Citations of References Responsive to Amendment
Teague teaches in Para. 26, miniaturized electronic medical sensors which can be placed on or within a patient to record and report any of variety of medically important parameters. A variety of medically important parameters of Teague recorded and reported from miniaturized electronic medical sensors placed on or within a patient, are substantively the same as physiologic data of Claim 1.
Cana teaches in Para. 26 and FIGS. 4 and 5, speed for a TAG being tracked. A speed for a TAG of Cana worn by a particular player in a sports field of play, is substantively the same as athletic performance of the player of Claim 1.
St. Laurent teaches in Para. 32, biometric sensors measure vital signs such as moisture level. A moisture level of an athlete measured by biometric sensors of St. Laurent, is substantively the same as athletic performance of the player includes at least one of moisture of Claim 4.
Cana teaches in Para. 38, a proximity TAG mounted to a game ball, such as for basketball, football and soccer, which is substantively the same as equipment utilized in the athletic activity including at least one of a ball of Claim 6.
II. Arguments for the Claim Rejections under 35 USC § 112
Applicant’s arguments, see page 8, filed 5/26/2026, with respect to the Claim Rejections under 35 USC § 112 of the previous office action have been fully considered and are persuasive. The Claim Rejections under 35 USC § 112 of the previous office action have been withdrawn.
However, new Claim Rejections under 35 USC § 112 are made in this office action responsive to the claim amendments.
III. Arguments for the Double Patenting Rejections
The examiner acknowledges that, if a proper double patenting rejection is maintained until one or both of the involved applications becomes final, or until the double patenting rejection is the only rejection remaining in at least one of the applications, Applicant will submit a terminal disclaimer.
IV. Arguments for Claim Rejections under 35 USC § 103
Applicant's arguments filed 5/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Page 9 of the Remarks presents the argument that Claim 1 has been amended to recite "wherein at least one of the peripheral devices is configured to sense physiologic data regarding the athletic performance of the player and transmit the data to the player network hub according to the first wireless protocol." This argument is not persuasive. Teague teaches in Para. 26, miniaturized electronic medical sensors which can be placed on or within a patient to record and report any of variety of medically important parameters. A variety of medically important parameters of Teague recorded and reported from miniaturized electronic medical sensors placed on or within a patient, are substantively the same as physiologic data of Claim 1.
Cana teaches in Para. 26 and FIGS. 4 and 5, speed for a TAG being tracked. A speed for a TAG of Cana worn by a particular player in a sports field of play, is substantively the same as athletic performance of the player of Claim 1.
Page 9 of the Remarks presents the argument that Moreover, claim 4 has been amended to further clarify the claim by reciting "wherein the data is physiologic data regarding the athletic performance of the player includes at least one of moisture or sweat of the player." This argument is not persuasive. St. Laurent teaches in Para. 32, biometric sensors measure vital signs such as moisture level. A moisture level of an athlete measured by biometric sensors of St. Laurent, is substantively the same as athletic performance of the player includes at least one of moisture of Claim 4.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JOSHUA Y SMITH whose telephone number is (571)270-1826. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10:30am-7pm ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, CHIRAG G SHAH can be reached at (571)272-3144. 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.
Joshua Smith
/J.S./
6-24-2026
/CHIRAG G SHAH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2477
Prosecution Insights