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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The accompanying information disclosure statement (IDS) submission(s) is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Section 33(a) of the America Invents Act reads as follows:
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no patent may issue on a claim directed to or encompassing a human organism.
Claims 32-58 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 and section 33(a) of the America Invents Act as being directed to or encompassing a human organism. See also Animals - Patentability, 1077 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 24 (April 21, 1987) (indicating that human organisms are excluded from the scope of patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101). Sole independent claim 32 positively recites “for opposing grip of the outer fingers” that necessarily includes a portion of the human body (outer fingers) in the scope of the claimed invention, rendering the claim non-statutory. Depending claims 33-58 inherit and do not remedy the non-statutory deficiencies.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 32-58 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pease et al. (US 2017/0239551 A1, hereinafter Pease.
For claim 32, Pease discloses a system (Figs 14, 20) ([0072-0120]), comprising:
a handheld device (480, 405, 415) (Figs 14, 20) ([0072-0120, especially 0089]) comprising an ergonomic body (480) (Fig 20) ([0089]) comprising a periphery of finger indentations (outer surface of 480 includes multiple indentations, facets, and holding structure(s) in Fig 20),
wherein the body comprises an opening (505) therethrough and is shaped to define a wide portion at one side of the body defining only three middle finger indentations (handle 495 may be held with only three inner fingers) (Fig 20) ([0089]) and which narrows to a narrow portion (about buttons 500) at an opposite side of the body (Fig 20) ([0089]), and
wherein opposing sides of the narrow portion define opposing finger indentations for opposing grip of the outer fingers (gripping at buttons 500 and jack 490 (Fig 20) ([0089]) and wherein the opposing finger indentations are symmetric with respect to the three middle finger indentations (Fig 20) ([0089]).
For claim 33, Pease discloses the system as claimed in claim 32, further comprising:
an electronic device (400, 420) comprising a processor (processors of 400, 420) (Figs 14, 20) ([0072-0120]), a digital display (displays o f 400,420) (Figs 14, 20) ([0072-0120]) controlled by the processor, a data interface (425, 430) (Fig 14) ([0072-0120]) controlled by the processor and a memory device in operable communication with the processor, the memory device comprising computer program code instruction controllers executed by the processor (Figs 14, 20) ([0072-0120]);
the handheld device comprising a processor (processors of 405, 415, 480), a data interface controlled by the processor (Figs 14, 20) ([0072-0120]), an accelerometer in operable communication with the processor (Figs 14, 20) ([0072-0120, especially 0078]), a feedback device controlled by the processor (Figs 14, 20) ([0072-0120, especially 0088]), the processor executing computer program code instruction controllers, wherein the system is configured to operate in:
a configuration mode ([0072-0120]) wherein the controllers of the electronic device ([0072-0120]): control a user interface displayed by the digital display to set: a locomotive style category ([0072-0120]); and a pace setpoint ([0072-0120]), control the data interface of the electronic device to transmit configuration settings according to the locomotive style category and the pace setpoint to the handheld device via the data interface of the handheld device ([0072-0120]); and
a feedback mode ([0072-0120]) wherein the controllers of the handheld device: measure signals from the accelerometer to determine ([0072-0120]): measured ([0072-0120]); and measured period ([0072-0120]); and compare the measured amplitude to an amplitude range of the locomotive style category to calculate a locomotive style comparison ([0072-0120]); compare the measured period to the pace setpoint to calculate a pace setpoint comparison ([0072-0120]); and control the feedback device according to the locomotive style comparison and the pace setpoint comparison ([0072-0120]).
For claim 34, Pease discloses the system as claimed in claim 33, wherein the locomotive style comparison categorizes whether the amplitude is above the amplitude range ([0072-0120]), wherein the amplitude is within the amplitude range and wherein the amplitude is below the amplitude range ([0072-0120]).
For claim 35, Pease discloses the system as claimed in claim 33, wherein the pace setpoint comparison categorizes whether the measured period is above a period range ([0072-0120]), wherein the measured period is within the period range and wherein the measured period is below the period range ([0072-0120]).
For claim 36, Pease discloses the system as claimed in claim 33, wherein the controllers of the handheld device convert the measured amplitude to an arm movement range in accordance with a configuration setting received from the electronic device ([0072-0120]).
For claim 37, Pease discloses the system as claimed in claim 36, wherein the configuration setting comprises body height and wherein the system is configured to convert the body height to an arm length ([0072-0120]).
For claim 38, Pease discloses the system as claimed in claim 36, wherein the configuration setting comprises arm length ([0072-0120]).
For claim 39, Pease discloses the system as claimed in claim 33, wherein the controllers of the handheld device convert the measured period to a measured pace in accordance with a configuration setting received from the electronic device ([0072-0120]).
For claim 40, Pease discloses the system as claimed in claim 39, wherein the configuration setting comprises body height and wherein the system is configured to convert the body height to a leg length ([0072-0120]).
For claim 41, Pease discloses the system as claimed in claim 39, wherein the configuration setting comprises leg length ([0072-0120]).
For claim 42, Pease discloses the system as claimed in claim 33, wherein,
in the configuration mode, the controllers of the electronic device:
control the user interface displayed by the digital display to configure a pace profile ([0072-0120]); and
control the data interface of the electronic device to transmit the configuration settings further according to the pace profile to the handheld device via the data interface of the handheld device ([0072-0120]); and
in the feedback mode, the controllers of the handheld device:
calculate a variable pace setpoint according to the pace profile ([0072-0120]); and
compare the measured period to the variable pace setpoint to calculate the pace setpoint comparison ([0072-0120]).
For claim 43, Pease discloses the system as claimed in claim 42, wherein the controllers of the handheld device are configured to calculate the variable pace according to time ([0072-0120]).
For claim 44, Pease discloses the system as claimed in claim 43, wherein the controllers of the handheld device are configured to analyze the signals from the accelerometer to detect motion to commence a timer to measure the time ([0072-0120]).
For claim 45, Pease discloses the system as claimed in claim 42, wherein the controllers of the handheld device are configured to calculate the variable pace according to distance ([0072-0120]).
For claim 46, Pease discloses the system as claimed in claim 43, wherein the controllers of the handheld device are configured to calculate the distance according to the signals from the accelerometer ([0072-0120]).
For claim 47, Pease discloses the system as claimed in claim 33, wherein the feedback device comprises a visual indicator (485, screen of 415) (Figs 14-20) controlled by the controllers of the electronic device ([0072-0120]) to: visually display a locomotive style comparison category; and visually display a pace setpoint comparison category ([0072-0120]).
For claim 48, Pease discloses the system as claimed in claim 47, wherein the visual indicator comprises: an above range indicator; an in-range indicator; and a below range indicator for each of the locomotive style comparison category and the pace setpoint comparison category (Figs 14-20) ([0072-0120]).
For claim 49, Pease discloses the system as claimed in claim 33, wherein the system comprises a pair of handheld devices (415, 480) (Figs 14-20) ([0072-0120]) and wherein, in the feedback mode, the system is configured to determine a distance between the handheld devices to further calculate an arm position locomotive style comparison ([0072-0120]).
For claim 50, Pease discloses the system as claimed in claim 49, wherein the system is configured to determine a distance between the handheld devices according to a received signal strength indication of a receiver of one of the handheld devices receiving a signal from a transmitter of another of the handheld devices ([0072-0120]).
For claim 51, Pease discloses the system as claimed in claim 49, wherein the system is configured to determine the distance between the handheld devices according to acceleration signal phase of the handheld devices ([0072-0120]).
For claim 52, Pease discloses the system as claimed in claim 51, wherein each handheld device comprises a triaxial accelerometer and wherein the acceleration signal phase is measured from frontal axes acceleration signals thereof ([0072-0120]).
For claim 53, Pease discloses the system as claimed in claim 47, wherein the system comprises a pair of handheld devices (415, 480) (Figs 14-20) ([0072-0120]) and wherein, in the feedback mode, the system is configured to determine a distance between the handheld devices to further calculate an arm position locomotive style comparison and wherein the visual indicator is further configured to visually display an arm position locomotive style comparison category ([0072-0120]).
For claim 54, Pease discloses the system as claimed in claim 33, wherein the controller of the handheld device is configured to autodetect exercise according to the signals from the accelerometer ([0072-0120]).
For claim 55, Pease discloses the system as claimed in claim 33, wherein the feedback device comprises a haptic output device ([0072-0120, especially 0088]) and wherein the controllers of the handheld device are configured to pulse the haptic output device ([0072-0120, especially 0088]).
For claim 56, Pease discloses the system as claimed in claim 55, wherein the controllers of the handheld device are configured to pulse the haptic output device at a rate corresponding to the pace setpoint comparison ([0072-0120, especially 0088]).
For claim 57, Pease discloses the system as claimed in claim 55, wherein the controllers of the handheld device are configured to pulse the haptic output device at a rate corresponding to the pace setpoint ([0072-0120, especially 0088]).
For claim 58, Pease discloses the system as claimed in claim 57, wherein the controllers of the handheld device are configured to correlate pulses with peaks of the signals received from the accelerometer of the handheld device ([0072-0120, especially 0088]).
For claim 59, Pease discloses the system as claimed in claim 47, wherein the narrow portion defines a central portion between the opposing finger indentations and wherein the visual indicator is located at the central portion (Figs 14 and 20).
Conclusion
The cited prior art made of record on the accompanying PTO-892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, relating to means for configuring, calibrating, and operating an electronic system for handheld haptic feedback motion tracking to a user by haptically and/or visually pace through activity based upon the user’s physiological characteristic(s) and/or movement(s).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jeffrey G. Hoekstra whose telephone number is (571)272-7232. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday from 5am-3pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Charles A. Marmor II can be reached at (571)272-4730. 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.
Jeffrey G. Hoekstra
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3791
/JEFFREY G. HOEKSTRA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791