DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
This office action is in response to the amendment filed 06/25/26. Claim(s) 1, 15, and 24 have been amended, no new claims have been added, and claims 27-28 have been cancelled. Thus, claims 1-26 are presently pending in this application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5-6, 14-16, and 24-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sankai (2014/0058299).
PNG
media_image1.png
433
372
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig 8 of Sankai.
With respect to claim 1, Sankai discloses a walk-about platform (214/215/242, fig 8) in support of an exoskeleton (wearable motion assist device; 100, fig 8), the walk-about platform comprising a conveyance system (200, fig 8) operable to facilitate movement of the walk-about platform about a ground surface (see [0111-113]), the conveyance system comprising a plurality of rollers (240,241, fig 8), and at least one actuator (motor, 218, fig 2) operable to actuate one or more of the plurality of rollers to facilitate the movement of the walk-about platform about the ground surface (see [0112]); a user input interface (structures and sensors 10,60,31-32, 21-22, 41-44 in fig 5 and harness of body weight support 220, fig 8) operable to control the conveyance system (see 100 with control unit 110 for control the drive unit, fig 2), wherein the user input interface is operable to interface with an upper body of an operator (see harness of 220 attached to the upper body of the interface in fig 8), such that the lower body of the operator is decoupled from the user input interface (see the user input interface as defined above is not attached to the lower leg (below the knee)) during use; and a bi-pedal locomotion zone (see annotated fig 8 of Sankai) defined, at least in part, by the plurality of rollers (see the annotated zone in between the rollers in fig 8), the bi-pedal locomotion zone providing clearance for bi-pedal locomotion of an operator donning the exoskeleton (see user P in fig 8 in the zone between the rollers), wherein the at least one actuator actuates the one or more of the plurality of rollers based on the bi-pedal locomotion of the operator donning the exoskeleton (see [0112]).
With respect to claim 2, Sankai discloses the plurality of rollers comprises front rollers (240, fig 8) and rear rollers (241, fig 8).
With respect to claim 5, Sankai discloses a user input interface (input unit; 230, fig 2) communicatively coupled to the conveyance system (see connection to motor 218 in fig 2), the user input interface being operable to provide one or more inputs to the conveyance system to facilitate the movement of the walk-about platform about the ground surface (see [0035]).
With respect to claim 6, Sankai discloses the user input interface comprises a harness (support device; 220, fig 8) that is coupled to the exoskeleton (see coupling as part of exoskeleton 100 in fig 8), the harness being configured to interface with the operator (harness is attached to operator P in fig 8).
With respect to claim 14, Sankai discloses the user input interface comprises a manual user input device (230, fig 2 allows the user to manually input information) operable to receive manual user input to facilitate operation of the conveyance system (see [0035]).
With respect to claim 15, Sankai discloses a walk-about exoskeleton system (1, fig 2) comprising an exoskeleton (motion assist device; 100, fig 8), a walk-about platform (214/215/242, fig 8) in support of the exoskeleton (see 214 supporting 100 in fig 8); a conveyance system (218, 240, 241, fig 8) operable to facilitate movement of the walk-about platform about a ground surface (see [0111-113]), the conveyance system comprising a plurality of rollers (240,241, fig 8), and at least one actuator (motor, 218, fig 2) operable to actuate one or more of the plurality of rollers to facilitate the movement of the walk-about platform about the ground surface (see [0112]); a user input interface (structures and sensors 10,60,31-32, 21-22, 41-44 in fig 5 and harness of body weight support 220, fig 8) operable to control the conveyance system (see 100 with control unit 110 for control the drive unit, fig 2), wherein the user input interface is operable to interface with an upper body of an operator (see harness of 220 attached to the upper body of the interface in fig 8), such that the lower body of the operator is decoupled from the user input interface (see the user input interface as defined above is not attached to the lower leg (below the knee)) during use; and a bi-pedal locomotion zone (see annotated fig 8 of Sankai) defined, at least in part, by the plurality of rollers (see the annotated zone in between the rollers in fig 8), the bi-pedal locomotion zone providing clearance for bi-pedal locomotion of an operator donning the exoskeleton (see user P in fig 8 in the zone between the rollers), wherein the at least one actuator actuates the one or more of the plurality of rollers based on the bi-pedal locomotion of the operator donning the exoskeleton (see [0112]).
With respect to claim 16, Sankai discloses the plurality of rollers comprises front rollers (240, fig 8) and rear rollers (241, fig 8).
With respect to claim 24, Sankai discloses a method of maneuvering (see fig 7 and [0090-0105]) a walk-about exoskeleton system (1, fig 2) about a ground surface (see [0111-113]), the method comprising moving into a bi-pedal locomotion zone (see annotated fig 8 of Sankai) of the walk-about wearable exoskeleton system, the bi-pedal locomotion zone defined, at least in part, by a walk-about platform that provides clearance for bi-pedal locomotion (see the annotated zone in between the rollers in fig 8); interfacing with an exoskeleton (100, fig 8) of the walk-about exoskeleton system; providing a motion input (speed or weight) to the walk-about platform via a user input interface (structures and sensors 10,60,31-32, 21-22, 41-44 in fig 5 and harness of body weight support 220, fig 8) that facilitates actuation of a conveyance system of the walk-about platform (see [0035-36] and 220 related to control unit 110 for control the drive unit, fig 2]); wherein the user input interface is operable to interface with an upper body of an operator (see harness of 220 attached to the upper body of the interface in fig 8), such that the lower body of the operator is decoupled from the user input interface (see the user input interface as defined above is not attached to the lower leg (below the knee)) during use; and moving the walk-about wearable exoskeleton system about the ground surface based on the motion input (see [0112]).
With respect to claim 25, Sankai discloses providing the motion input comprises applying a force (weight applied, see [0035]) to a harness (220, fig 8) via bi-pedal locomotion about the ground surface within the bi-pedal locomotion zone (see [0035]).
With respect to claim 26, Sankai discloses providing the motion input comprises initiating a manual user input (see [0035]) via a manual user input device (230, fig 2).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 3-4, 13, and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sankai as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Rodetsky (2009/0298653).
With respect to claims 3 and 17, the modified Sankai shows front and rear rollers (see claims 2 and 16 above) but lacks the front rollers and the rear rollers comprise omnidirectional wheels.
However, Rodetsky teaches a mobile gait device (elements of fig 1 not including the person (1)) with front rollers (only one side of the device is shown in fig 10 but would have two front wheels 23-1, fig 10) and rear rollers (only one side of the device is shown in fig 10 but would have two rear wheels 24-1, fig 10) comprising omnidirectional wheels (see [0065]) wherein at least one actuator actuates the omnidirectional wheels to facilitate the movement about the ground surface (see [0074]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the front and rear rollers of Sankai to include omnidirectional wheels as taught by Rodetsky so as to simulate normal walking patterns as the user walks forward, backward or makes turns (see [0011] of Rodetsky).
PNG
media_image2.png
306
378
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig 10 of Rodetsky.
With respect to claims 4 and 18, the modified Sankai shows the plurality of rollers comprises omnidirectional tracks (see fig 10 of Rodetsky where the omnidirectional wheels comprise multiple rollers per wheel 23-1 on a track (see annotated fig 10 of Rodetsky where the multiple wheels as labeled form a track).
With respect to claim 13, Sankai shows all the elements as claimed above but lacks the user input interface comprises a transceiver operable to communicate with a mobile device.
However, Rodetsky teaches a mobile gait device (elements of fig 1 not including the person (1)) with an input interface (motion control and monitoring block; 13, fig 15) comprising a transceiver (not explicitly stated but the wireless signals from the remote device are received by 13, see [0074]) operable to communicate with a mobile device (remote control; 27, fig 15 and [0074]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the user input interface of Sankai to include a transceiver as taught by Rodetsky so as to enable the user to bring the apparatus from a remote location out of user's sight and serves as a communication device for a remote assistance, if necessary, the assistant can remotely take control over the apparatus (see [0014] of Rodetsky).
With respect to claim 19, the modified Sankai shows the user input interface (input unit; 230, fig 2 of Sankai) is communicatively coupled to the conveyance system (see connection to motor 218 in fig 2 of Sankai), the user input interface being operable to provide one or more inputs to the conveyance system to facilitate the movement of the walk-about platform about the ground surface (see [0035] of Sankai).
Claim(s) 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sankai as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Takenaka (2022/0314428).
With respect to claim 7, the modified Sankai shows all the elements as claimed above but lacks the user input interface further comprises a force sensor.
However, Takenaka teaches a mobile device (51, fig 3) with a user input interface (90, fig 5) comprising a force sensor (81R, 81L, fig 3) to detect a force exerted by the operator (see [0133]) via a harness (70, fig 3), and wherein the conveyance system facilitates the movement of the device about the ground surface based on the detected force (see [0133]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the user input interface of Sankai to include a force sensor as taught by Takenaka so as to control movement of the device based on detected data in addition to manual inputs.
With respect to claim 8, the modified Sankai shows the force sensor comprises a six degree of freedom force moment sensor (see [0133] of Takenaka).
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sankai as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Ang (12,036,158).
With respect to claim 9, the modified Sankai shows all the elements as claimed above but lacks the user input interface comprises a position sensor.
However, Ang teaches a mobility aid (200, fig 2C) with a user input interface (230, fig 2C) comprises a position sensor (col. 19, lines 49-55) operable with a harness (232, fig 2C) to detect a position of the operator (col. 19, lines 55-63), and wherein a conveyance system facilitates the movement of the mobility aid about the ground surface based on the detected position (col. 20, lines 2-10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the user input interface of Sankai to include a position sensor as taught by Ang so as to an ease of movement of the device based on the user rather than only manual inputs.
With respect to claim 10, the modified Sankai shows the position sensor comprises a displacement sensor (see col. 19, lines 56-58 of Ang).
Claim(s) 11-12 and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sankai as applied to claims 5 and 15 above, and further in view of Lee (9,789,023).
With respect to claim 11, the modified Sankai shows all the elements as claimed above but lacks the user input interface comprises an ultrasonic sensor.
However, Lee teaches a walking assist device (1, fig 1) with a user interface (5, fig 1) comprises an ultrasonic sensor (54, fig 1) operable to sense a position of the operator (col. 7, lines 41-53), and wherein a conveyance system facilitates the movement (for controlling speed of movement) of the device about the ground surface based on the detected position (col. 7, lines 41-53, where the sensor detects the distance i.e., a position of the user from the main navigation device).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the user input interface of Sankai to include an ultrasonic sensor on a base (216, fig 8 of Sankai) as taught by Lee so as to allow for automatic navigation of the device and to avoid objects in the path of movement.
With respect to claim 12, the modified Sankai shows the ultrasonic sensor is disposed on a walk-about base of the walk-about platform (see modification by Lee in claim 11 above), and wherein the optical or ultrasonic sensor detects a leg position of the operator (the modification by Lee would provide the leg position since the sensor determines the distance which would provide the location of the leg).
With respect to claim 23, the modified Sankai shows an interface (input unit; 230, fig 2 of Sankai) but lacks the interface that connects the walk-about exoskeleton to a remote navigation system.
However, Lee teaches a walking assist device (1, fig 1) with a user interface (5, fig 1) connecting an exoskeleton (3, fig 1) to a remote navigation system (5, fig 1) wherein a conveyance system is operably integrated with the remote navigation system via the interface (col. 7, lines 23-28), and the remote navigation system is configured to facilitate movement of the walk-about platform about the ground surface in an autonomous mode (col. 7, lines 23-39).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the user input interface of Sankai to include a navigation system as taught by Lee so as to allow the user to move about to a desired location on their own.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sankai and Rodetsky as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of Takenaka (2022/0314428).
With respect to claim 20, the modified Sankai shows all the elements as claimed above but lacks the user input interface further comprises a force sensor.
However, Takenaka teaches a mobile device (51, fig 3) with a user input interface (90, fig 5 comprising a force sensor (81R, 81L, fig 3) to detect a force exerted by the operator (see [0133]) via a harness (70, fig 3), and wherein the conveyance system facilitates the movement of the device about the ground surface based on the detected force (see [0133]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the platform of Sankai to include a force sensor as taught by Takenaka so as to control movement of the device based on detected data in addition to manual inputs.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sankai and Rodetsky as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of Ang (12,036,158).
With respect to claim 21, the modified Sankai shows all the elements as claimed above but lacks the user input interface comprises a position sensor.
However, Ang teaches a mobility aid (200, fig 2C) with a user input interface (230, fig 2C) comprises a position sensor (col. 19, lines 49-55) operable with a harness (232, fig 2C) to detect a position of the operator (col. 19, lines 55-63), and wherein a conveyance system facilitates the movement of the mobility aid about the ground surface based on the detected position (col. 20, lines 2-10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the user input of Sankai to include a position sensor as taught by Ang so as to an ease of movement of the device based on the user rather than only manual inputs.
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sankai and Rodetsky as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of Lee (9789023).
With respect to claim 22, the modified Sankai shows all the elements as claimed above but lacks the user input interface comprises an ultrasonic sensor.
However, Lee teaches a walking assist device (1, fig 1) with a user interface (5, fig 1) comprises an ultrasonic sensor (54, fig 1) operable to sense a position of the operator (col. 7, lines 41-53), and wherein a conveyance system facilitates the movement (for controlling speed of movement) of the device about the ground surface based on the detected position (col. 7, lines 41-53, where the sensor detects the distance i.e., a position of the user from the main navigation device).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the user input interface of Sankai to include an ultrasonic sensor on a base (216, fig 8 of Sankai) as taught by Lee so as to allow for automatic navigation of the device and to avoid objects in the path of movement.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/25/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues on pgs. 9-10 that the "Applicant's claim does not recite that the "lower leg (below the knee)" is decoupled from the user input interface" and "Examiner has introduced a limitation into the claim that does not exist, which is inappropriate and improper." the lower body includes below the knee and the user interface as rejected does not include below the knee. Additionally, as Applicant pointed to in the arguments, the lower body includes the hip down (which would include below the knee) and as seen in Sankai there is an upper body harness attached to the chest. The upper attachment does not include the lower body as claimed and as defined by the rejection by Examiner. The claim language does not require the entire lower body extending from the waist to the feet of the wearer being decoupled and, as rejected, below the knees is decoupled which is part of the lower body. Further, Examiner does not add a new limitation but rather cites a body part in the rejection. Thus, the rejection stands.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KELSEY E BALLER whose telephone number is (571)272-8153. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 AM - 4 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Timothy Stanis can be reached at 571-272-5139. 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.
/KELSEY E BALLER/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/TU A VO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights