DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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)(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.
Claims 1, 3-6, 8, 10, 12-15, 17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Seese et al. (U.S. Publication No. 20250046419).
Regarding claim 1, Seese teaches an exercise analysis method, comprising: transmitting sensing data through a network (Paragraph 93, “the wearable cardiac monitoring device 100 may communicate with the remote server 102 via cellular networks”), wherein the sensing data corresponds to a motion state (Abstract, “the server processor(s) are configured to…receive from the device at least one ECG signal, motion data, and wear state data”); generating analysis information according to the sensing data (Paragraph 94, “The remote server 102 is configured to receive and process the signals and data transmitted by the wearable cardiac monitoring device 100”), wherein the analysis information is used to analyze the motion state (Paragraph 144, “the remote server 102 determines the activity information by classifying the patient's activity level over time into various activity level types”); giving feedback on the analysis information through the network (Paragraph 99, “a patient user device 108 may be a specialized user interface configured to communicate with the remote server 102”); and presenting the analysis information by a user interface (Paragraph 98, “The patient user device 108 may then display the progress of the patient 104 relative to the progress of the other ambulatory cardiac patients 110”).
Regarding claim 3, Seese teaches wherein generating the analysis information according to the sensing data comprises: converting a plurality of values in the sensing data into the analysis information, wherein the analysis information is at least one of a statistic per unit time (Paragraph 286, “The exercise screen 1830 also shows the patient 104 their average pace in steps per minute, current pace in steps per minute, and current heart rate”), a duration, a speed, and a position distribution.
With respect to claims 4-5, instant claim is proviso upon limitation “position distribution” not required by the claim 3; therefore, the limitation of instant claims do not come into force.
Regarding claim 6, Seese teaches wherein the motion state comprises a plurality of motion phases, and generating the analysis information according to the sensing data comprises: determining a statistic of the motion phases, wherein the analysis information comprises the statistic of the motion phases (Paragraph 286).
Regarding claim 8, Seese teaches wherein the motion state is a walking state (Paragraph 144).
Regarding claim 10, Seese teaches a server (Fig.1, 102) used for exercise analysis, comprising: a communication transceiver (Paragraph 94, “The remote server 102 is configured to receive and process the signals and data transmitted by the wearable cardiac monitoring device 100” and paragraph 98, “the patient user device 108 may receive data from the remote server 102”); a storage, storing a program code (Paragraph 94); and a processor, coupled to the communication transceiver and the storage, loading the program code and execute (Paragraph 94): receiving sensing data through a network by the communication transceiver (Paragraph 93, “the wearable cardiac monitoring device 100 may communicate with the remote server 102 via cellular networks”), wherein the sensing data corresponds to a motion state (Abstract, “he server processor(s) are configured to…receive from the device at least one ECG signal, motion data, and wear state data”); generating analysis information according to the sensing data (Paragraph 94, “The remote server 102 is configured to receive and process the signals and data transmitted by the wearable cardiac monitoring device 100”), wherein the analysis information is used to analyze the motion state (Paragraph 144, “the remote server 102 determines the activity information by classifying the patient's activity level over time into various activity level types”); and giving feedback on the analysis information through the network by the communication transceiver (Paragraph 99, “a patient user device 108 may be a specialized user interface configured to communicate with the remote server 102”), wherein the analysis information is used to be presented by a user interface (Paragraph 98, “The patient user device 108 may then display the progress of the patient 104 relative to the progress of the other ambulatory cardiac patients 110”).
Regarding claim 12, Seese teaches wherein the processor further executes: converting a plurality of values in the sensing data into the analysis information, wherein the analysis information is at least one of a statistic per unit time (Paragraph 286, “The exercise screen 1830 also shows the patient 104 their average pace in steps per minute, current pace in steps per minute, and current heart rate”), a duration, a speed, and a position distribution.
With respect to claims 13-14, instant claim is proviso upon limitation “position distribution” not required by the claim 3; therefore, the limitation of instant claims do not come into force.
Regarding claim 15, Seese teaches wherein the motion state comprises a plurality of motion phases, and the processor further executes: determining a statistic of the motion phases, wherein the analysis information comprises the statistic of the motion phases (Paragraph 286).
Regarding claim 17, Seese teaches wherein the motion state is a walking state (Paragraph 144).
Regarding claim 19, Seese teaches a terminal apparatus (Fig.1, 108) used for exercise analysis, comprising: a display; a communication transceiver; a storage, storing a program code (Paragraph 98); and a processor, coupled to the display, the communication transceiver, and the storage, loading the program code and executes: transmitting sensing data through a network by the communication transceiver (Paragraph 93, “the wearable cardiac monitoring device 100 may communicate with the remote server 102 via cellular networks”), wherein the sensing data corresponds to a motion state (Abstract, “the server processor(s) are configured to…receive from the device at least one ECG signal, motion data, and wear state data”); receiving analysis information through the network by the communication transceiver (Paragraph 99, “a patient user device 108 may be a specialized user interface configured to communicate with the remote server 102”), wherein the analysis information is generated according to the sensing data state (Paragraph 144, “the remote server 102 determines the activity information by classifying the patient's activity level over time into various activity level types”), and the analysis information is used to analyze the motion state; and presenting the analysis information on a user interface by the display (Paragraph 98, “The patient user device 108 may then display the progress of the patient 104 relative to the progress of the other ambulatory cardiac patients 110”).
Regarding claim 20, Seese teaches wherein the motion state is a walking state (Paragraph 144).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 2 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seese et al. (U.S. Publication No. 20250046419) in view of Kuriyama et al. (U.S. Publication No. 20110137836).
Regarding claim 2, Seese teaches all the features of claim 1 as outlined above, Seese is silent about wherein generating the analysis information according to the sensing data comprises: sorting the sensing data according to a time relationship, wherein the time relationship is an ordering of a plurality of values in the sensing data corresponding to times points, and the analysis information comprises the sorted values.
Kuriyama teaches wherein generating the analysis information according to the sensing data comprises: sorting the sensing data according to a time relationship, wherein the time relationship is an ordering of a plurality of values in the sensing data corresponding to times points, and the analysis information comprises the sorted values (Fig.9 and paragraphs 25 and 62).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to sort Seese’s sensing data in a time relationship because it allows for the analysis of dynamic, time-dependent behavior.
Regarding claim 11, Seese teaches all the features of claim 10 as outlined above, Seese is silent about wherein the processor further executes: sorting the sensing data according to a time relationship, wherein the time relationship is an ordering of a plurality of values in the sensing data corresponding to times points, and the analysis information comprises the sorted values.
Kuriyama teaches wherein the processor further executes: sorting the sensing data according to a time relationship, wherein the time relationship is an ordering of a plurality of values in the sensing data corresponding to times points, and the analysis information comprises the sorted values (Fig.9 and paragraphs 25 and 62).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to sort Seese’s sensing data in a time relationship because it allows for the analysis of dynamic, time-dependent behavior.
Claims 7 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seese et al. (U.S. Publication No. 20250046419) in view of Nakashima et al. (U.S. Publication No. 20190150792).
Regarding claim 7, Seese teaches all the features of claim 6 as outlined above, Seese is silent about wherein the motion phases comprise a stance phase and a swing phase, and the exercise analysis method further comprises: identifying whether the sensing data belongs to the stance phase or the swing phase.
Nakashima teaches wherein the motion phases comprise a stance phase and a swing phase, and the exercise analysis method further comprises: identifying whether the sensing data belongs to the stance phase or the swing phase (Paragraph 59).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Seese’s system to detect stance phase and swing phase because understanding stance and swing phases is critical for analyzing human motion to optimize athletic performance, reduce injury risk, and diagnose gait abnormalities.
Regarding claim 16, Seese teaches all the features of claim 15 as outlined above, Seese is silent about wherein the motion phases comprise a stance phase and a swing phase, and the processor further executes: identifying whether the sensing data belongs to the stance phase or the swing phase.
Nakashima teaches wherein the motion phases comprise a stance phase and a swing phase, and the processor further executes: identifying whether the sensing data belongs to the stance phase or the swing phase (Paragraph 59).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Seese’s system to detect stance phase and swing phase because understanding stance and swing phases is critical for analyzing human motion to optimize athletic performance, reduce injury risk, and diagnose gait abnormalities.
Claims 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seese et al. (U.S. Publication No. 20250046419) in view of Subramaniam et al. (U.S. Publication No. 20200204631).
Regarding claim 9, Seese teaches all the features of claim 1 as outlined above, Seese is silent about wherein transmitting the sensing data through the network comprises: transmitting the sensing data by WebSocket.
Subramaniam teaches wherein transmitting the sensing data through the network comprises: transmitting the sensing data by WebSocket (Abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to transmit Seese’s sensing data by WebSocket because WebSocket provides low latency and real-time communication.
Regarding claim 18, Seese teaches all the features of claim 1 as outlined above, Seese is silent about wherein the processor further executes: receiving the sensing data through WebSocket by the communication transceiver.
Subramaniam wherein the processor further executes: receiving the sensing data through WebSocket by the communication transceiver (Abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to transmit Seese’s sensing data by WebSocket because WebSocket provides low latency and real-time communication.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XIN Y ZHONG whose telephone number is (571)272-3798. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 a.m. - 6 p.m..
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, Kristina Deherrera can be reached at 303-297-4237. 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.
/XIN Y ZHONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855