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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, claims 19,22-23,27,29-30,32,35,37-39 and 86-96 in the reply filed on 6/1/2026 is acknowledged.
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.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with PCT Rule 11 because reference character “310” has been used to designate both a pulse generator and a crankset angle sensor, see Fig. 10B. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with PCT Rule 11 are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claim(s) 19, 22, 27, 29, 39, 88, 91, 94 and 96 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2007/0208392 to Kuschner et al. (Kuschner).
In reference to at least claim 19
Kuschner discloses a system comprising: a cycling device (e.g. exercise bicycle, para. [0031]) comprising: a crankset (e.g. bicycle crank 432); a pair of appendage receptacles that are coupled to the crankset (e.g. pedal 433), wherein the pair of appendage receptacles are each configured to immobilize a respective joint of a user (e.g. fastener 434, “Foot 425 is secured onto pedal 433 with a fastener 434, such as a boot, Velcro straps or other device.”, para. [0031]); a crankset angle sensor coupled to the crankset, wherein the crankset angle sensor is configured to provide an output indicative of an angle of the crankset (e.g. “Given the knee angle at a point in time and knowing if the knee angle is increasing or decreasing, controller 130 then computes the crank angle B”, para. [0032], “a shaft encoder can be connected to crank 432 of the bicycle and the measured knee angle can be correlated to the measured crank angle”, para. [0033]); and a controller in communication with the crankset angle sensor (e.g. controller 130); wherein the controller is configured to control stimulation from an external or implanted pulse generator based at least in part on the angle of the crankset (e.g. “Given the knee angle at a point in time and knowing if the knee angle is increasing or decreasing, controller 130 then computes the crank angle B and stimulates the appropriate muscles, based on the crank angle diagram shown in FIG. 3 and the stimulation protocol for a particular person.”, para. [0032]).
In reference to at least claim 22
Kuschner discloses wherein the crankset angle sensor comprises a rotary encoder ( e.g. “a shaft encoder can be connected to crank 432 of the bicycle and the measured knee angle can be correlated to the measured crank angle”, para. [0033]).
In reference to at least claim 27
Kuschner discloses an external or implanted pulse generator in communication with the controller (e.g. “The stimulation is in the form of electrical pulses of selectable magnitude, frequency, pulse width and commencement and termination.”, para. [0027], “A stimulation protocol is stored by controller 130 and is transmitted to the stimulators and include such parameters as: pulse frequency, amplitude and width.”, para. [0028], therefore some form of pulse generator is present within the controller 130).
In reference to at least claim 29
Kuschner discloses wherein the controller is configured to deliver functional neural stimulation to a plurality of groups of muscle fibers, wherein, for each group of muscle fibers, stimulation is configured to start at a respective first rotational position of the crankset and cease at a respective second rotational position of the crankset (e.g. Fig. 3, “The crank angle is the angle with respect to a reference line through the center of the axle of the crank. Crank angle diagram 301 in FIG. 3 shows the stimulation pattern of muscles in one cycle. In 301, the reference line is at 0.degree., which is to the right of the center of the circle. Table 302 shows the relationship between crank angle, the muscles stimulated and the resultant leg motion during FES of a person's legs on a bicycle”, para. [0026], “The timing of the muscle stimulation is triggered by the crank angle, and the magnitude of the stimulation can be adjusted based on crank velocity (rpm). The stimulation is in the form of electrical pulses of selectable magnitude, frequency, pulse width and commencement and termination.”, para. [0027]).
In reference to at least claim 39
Kuschner discloses cyclically stimulating fibers of a plurality of muscles of a user (e.g. “Given the knee angle at a point in time and knowing if the knee angle is increasing or decreasing, controller 130 then computes the crank angle B and stimulates the appropriate muscles, based on the crank angle diagram shown in FIG. 3 and the stimulation protocol for a particular person.”, para. [0032]) having at least one appendage comprising a distal portion, wherein the distal portion of the at least one appendage of the user is coupled to a crankset (e.g. fastener 434, “Foot 425 is secured onto pedal 433 with a fastener 434, such as a boot, Velcro straps or other device.”, para. [0031]), wherein cyclically stimulating the fibers of the plurality of muscles of the user comprises beginning stimulation of the fibers of each muscle of the plurality of muscles at a respective first angle of the crankset and ceasing stimulation of the fibers of each muscle of the plurality of muscles at a respective second angle of the crankset (e.g. Fig. 3, “controller 130 then computes the crank angle B and stimulates the appropriate muscles, based on the crank angle diagram shown in FIG. 3 and the stimulation protocol for a particular person.”, para. [0032]).
In reference to at least claim 88
Kuschner discloses wherein the crankset angle sensor comprises at least one orientation sensor that is coupled to the crankset (e.g. “Given the knee angle at a point in time and knowing if the knee angle is increasing or decreasing, controller 130 then computes the crank angle B”, para. [0032], “a shaft encoder can be connected to crank 432 of the bicycle and the measured knee angle can be correlated to the measured crank angle”, para. [0033]).
In reference to at least claim 91
Kuschner discloses wherein the functional neural stimulation apparatus comprises a plurality of electrodes that are configured to stimulate respective muscles of the user (e.g. stimulators 101-103 contain electrodes, “Stimulators 101, 102 and 103”, para. [0022]).
In reference to at least claim 94
Kuschner discloses wherein the cycling device is a stationary bike (e.g. “when using a stationary bicycle”, para. [0024], “In a person's use of a stationary bicycle with FES cycling”, para. [0036], [0035], “ the ability to use regular stationary exercise equipment such as a recumbent bicycle”, para. [0050]).
In reference to at least claim 96
Kuschner discloses wherein the plurality of muscles comprises two or more of: a left quadriceps, a left gluteus maximus, a left hamstring extensor, a left hamstring flexor, a right quadriceps, a right gluteus maximus, a right hamstring extensor, or a right hamstring flexor (e.g. Fig. 3 associated para. [0026]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2007/0208392 to Kuschner et al. (Kuschner) in view of KR1020050099228 to Chun et al. (Chun) (cited by applicant as KR100590990– machine translation provided).
In reference to at least claim 23
Kuschner teaches a device according to claim 19 and further discloses a shaft encoder (e.g. “a shaft encoder can be connected to crank 432 of the bicycle and the measured knee angle can be correlated to the measured crank angle”, para. [0033]).
However, Kuschner does not explicitly teach a transmission, wherein the transmission comprises one of: a direct coupling between the rotary encoder and the crankset; a first pulley that is rotationally fixed to the crankset, a second pulley that is coupled to the rotary encoder, and a belt that extends between the first pulley and the second pulley; or a first gear that is coupled to the rotary encoder and a second gear that is coupled to the crankset, wherein the first gear is coupled to the second gear.
Chun, within the same field of endeavor, discloses a system that includes a cycling device (e.g. 10, Fig. 1) that includes a rotary encoder (e.g. 20) that includes a pulley (e.g. 21) of a rotation shaft (e.g. 12) of pedals (e.g. A, B), a rotating plate (e.g. 22) with slits at equal intervals for every unit, a timing belt (e.g. 24) coupled to a pulley (e.g. 23) of the rotating plate (e.g. 22), a photosensor (e.g. 25) recognizing the slit of the rotating plate (e.g. 22), and an origin sensor (e.g. 26) recognizing the starting point (e.g. Fig. 1, associated text under Configuration and Operation of Invention, pgs. 2-3 of translation).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Kuschner to include a direct coupling between the rotary encoder and the crankset; a first pulley that is rotationally fixed to the crankset, a second pulley that is coupled to the rotary encoder, and a belt that extends between the first pulley and the second pulley, as taught by Chun, in order to provide an arrangement that maximizes rehabilitation treatment effect (‘900, pg. 4, last para. of translation).
Claim(s) 30, 35 and 92 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2007/0208392 to Kuschner et al. (Kuschner) in view of US 2004/0023759 to Duncan et al. (Duncan – cited by applicant).
In reference to at least claim 30
Kuschner teaches a device according to claim 19 and further discloses a controller (e.g. “controller 130”, para. [0022]).
However, Kuschner does not explicitly teach a computing device in communication with the controller, wherein the computing device is configured to: provide an interface to a clinician; receive, by the interface, at least one parameter selection from the clinician; and set at least one control parameter of the controller.
Duncan, in the same field of endeavor, discloses a system (e.g. 10) that includes a cycling device (e.g. 20) that includes a computing device in communication with a controller (e.g. “The control means 32 receives a first set of signals through a first signal path 33 provided by a cable (not depicted) extending from the display screen 27”, para. [0079]) that is configured to provide an interface (e.g. display screen 27) and receive, by the interface, at least one parameter selection from the clinician; and set at least one control parameter of the controller (e.g. “The depicted screen 27 provides a means for the person 12 to operate the apparatus 10, through the use of touchpads on the screen 27. The touchpads provide the person 12 with one means of activating or deactivating the apparatus 10”, para. [0076], “The control means 32 receives a first set of signals through a first signal path 33 provided by a cable (not depicted) extending from the display screen 27”, para. [0079], “For example, the person 12 can input to the functional electrical stimulation system 31 an intention to perform an exercise routine or use the touchpads on the display screen 27 to inform the system 30 that a cycling action of the legs is required and that accordingly a suitable action sequence from the stimulator will be required.”, para. [0084]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Kuschner to include a computing device in communication with the controller that provides an interface, receives at least one parameter selection from the clinician and sets at least one control parameter of the controller, as taught by Duncan, in order to provide the user the ability to control operations of the electrical stimulation provided such as turning the electrical stimulation on and off and controlling the rate of muscle stimulation provided (‘759, para. [0076], [0084]).
In reference to at least claim 35
Kuschner teaches a device according to claim 19. However, Kuschner does not explicitly teach a display that is configured to display visual feedback associated with use of the cycling device.
Duncan, in the same field of endeavor, discloses a system (e.g. 10) that includes a cycling device (e.g. 20) that includes a display that is configured to display visual feedback associated with use of the cycling device (e.g. “The display screen 27 is also used to provide feedback to the person 12 on their exercise, such as time elapsed in undertaking the exercise.”, para. [0076]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Kuschner to include a display that is configured to display visual feedback associated with use of the cycling device, as taught by Duncan, in order to provide feedback to the user on the exercise being performed such as the time elapsed (‘759, para. [0076]).
In reference to at least claim 92
Kuschner modified by Duncan renders obvious a device according to claim 30. Duncan further discloses wherein the at least one control parameter comprises at least one of a stimulation current, a pulse width, a start angle corresponding to an angle of the crankset at which stimulation begins, or a stop angle corresponding to an angle of the crankset at which stimulation ceases, wherein each control parameter of the at least one control parameter is associated with a particular group of fibers of muscle fibers (e.g. “The depicted screen 27 provides a means for the person 12 to operate the apparatus 10, through the use of touchpads on the screen 27. The touchpads provide the person 12 with one means of activating or deactivating the apparatus 10”, para. [0076], “For example, the person 12 can input to the functional electrical stimulation system 31 an intention to perform an exercise routine or use the touchpads on the display screen 27 to inform the system 30 that a cycling action of the legs is required and that accordingly a suitable action sequence from the stimulator will be required.”, para. [0084],[0081], therefore the control parameter includes at least a start/stop of providing the stimulation current, a rate at which the stimulation is provided and an action sequence comprising a sequence of stimulation provided in order the muscles in response to the crank).
Claim(s) 32 and 93 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2007/0208392 to Kuschner et al. (Kuschner) in view of US 2004/0023759 to Duncan et al. (Duncan) and US 2004/0026891 to Berkelmans (Berkelmans).
In reference to at least claim 32
Kuschner teaches a device according to claim 19. However, Kuschner does not explicitly teach wherein the cycling device comprises: a plurality of wheels, wherein the crankset is coupled to at least one wheel of the plurality of wheels. It was well-known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use sensors on bicycles or tricycles to initiate muscle stimulation in which the cycling device includes a plurality of wheels, wherein the crankset is coupled to at least one wheel of the plurality of wheels as evidence by Duncan (e.g. “Existing exercise bicycles and tricycles for use by paraplegics and the like essentially utilise sensors on the bicycle or tricycle itself, such as on the pedal crank, to initiate muscle stimulation”, para. [0007], “In a preferred embodiment, the rotatable means is a pedal and crank arrangement of an exercise means, such as an exercise bicycle or tricycle”, para. [0021]) or Berkelmans (e.g. Figs. 1-2, “while the reclining cycle part is provided with a pedal angle gauge which transmits a position of the at least one pedal relative to a crank axle to the computer in order to perform, on the basis of that position, an electrostimulation on the leg muscles according to a predetermined protocol.”, para. [0011], [0023], “complete activation of the leg muscles of the user takes place with the aid of an incremental pedal angle gauge which transmits the position of the crank set or pedal assembly to the computer (laptop or palmtop).”, para [0029]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Kuschner to include the cycling device including a plurality of wheels, wherein the crankset is coupled to at least one wheel of the plurality of wheels as such technique was known within the art and would have yielded the predictable result of providing muscle stimulation according to a predetermined protocol.
In reference to at least claim 93
Kuschner as evidence by Duncan and Berkelmans renders obvious a system according to claim 32. Duncan discloses the cycling device being a tricycle (e.g. “Existing exercise bicycles and tricycles for use by paraplegics and the like essentially utilise sensors on the bicycle or tricycle itself, such as on the pedal crank, to initiate muscle stimulation”, para. [0007], “In a preferred embodiment, the rotatable means is a pedal and crank arrangement of an exercise means, such as an exercise bicycle or tricycle”, para. [0021]). Berkelmans also discloses the use of a recumbent tricycle (e.g. Figs. 1-2, “while the reclining cycle part is provided with a pedal angle gauge which transmits a position of the at least one pedal relative to a crank axle to the computer in order to perform, on the basis of that position, an electrostimulation on the leg muscles according to a predetermined protocol.”, para. [0011], [0023]). As stated above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Kuschner to include the cycling device including a plurality of wheels, wherein the crankset is coupled to at least one wheel of the plurality of wheels such as a recumbent tricycle as such technique was known within the art and would have yielded the predictable result of providing muscle stimulation according to a predetermined protocol.
Claim(s) 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2007/0208392 to Kuschner et al. (Kuschner) in view of US 2016/0023081 to Popa-Simil et al. (Popa).
In reference to at least claim 37
Kuschner teaches a device according to claim 19. However, Kuschner does not explicitly teach the system further comprising at least one respiration measurement device.
Popa, within a similar field of endeavor, discloses a system with a cycling device (e.g. 5A) that includes at least one respiration measurement device (e.g. “monitors the pulse rate and oxygen level in blood, a supplementary one 981, measures the chest functions as EKG and respiratory functions during the effort. A module 982 connected to the facial mask is measuring the air intake flow and the exhaust residual oxygen and carbon dioxide, to measure the lung's efficiency”, para. [0647]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Kuschner to include at least one respiration measurement device, as taught by Popa, in order to provide personalized body control for health and exercise and to measure effort and the lung’s efficiency (e.g. ‘081, para. [0647]).
Claim(s) 38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2007/0208392 to Kuschner et al. (Kuschner) in view of US Patent No. 7,837,595 to Rice (Rice).
In reference to at least claim 38
Kuschner teaches a device according to claim 19. However, Kuschner does not explicitly teach the system further comprising at least one grip sensor.
Rice, within a similar field of endeavor, discloses a system with a cycling device (e.g. Fig. 2) that includes at least one grip sensor (e.g. “Further input devices may comprise one or more of seat, pedal, floor and hand-grip pressure sensors, sensing the users physical movements, i.e. if they are seated/standing, pushing and pulling the pedals, with their foot down or with no hands.”, Col, 7, ll. 34-37, Col. 33, ll. 13-20, “This may comprise an ear clip type sensor or a chest belt type sensor assembly or a hand-grip style sensor.”, Col. 10, ll. 25-28, “This may include biosensor means, connected to the user's body by ear clip, chest belt, hand grip, or whatever type devices, which sense and/or measure the heart rate of the user and produce a signal representative thereof.”, Col. 17, ll. 34-37)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Kuschner modified to include at least one grip sensor., as taught by Rice, in order to provide an indication of the users physical movements.
Claim(s) 86-87 and 89-90 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2007/0208392 to Kuschner et al. (Kuschner) in view of US 2016/0089072 to Tetsuka (Tetsuka – cited by applicant).
In reference to at least claim 86
Kuschner teaches a device according to claim 19. Kuschner further discloses wherein the controller comprises a wireless receiver, wherein the cycling device further comprises a wireless transmitter that is in communication with the crankset angle sensor, wherein the controller is in wireless communication with the crankset angle sensor by the wireless transmitter (e.g. “Controller 130 is a system control unit and communicates with the stimulators 101, etc. via wireless communications link 120. Controller 130 also communicates with sensors 110, etc. via wireless communications link 121.”, para. [0022], [0031], therefore the controller includes some form of wireless receiver) and further discloses the controller being in communication with a shaft encoder (e.g. “a shaft encoder can be connected to crank 432 of the bicycle and the measured knee angle can be correlated to the measured crank angle and the results stored in a lookup table in controller 130.”, para. [0033]).
However, Kuschner does not explicitly teach wherein the cycling device further comprises a wireless transmitter that is in communication with the crankset angle sensor, wherein the controller is in wireless communication with the crankset angle sensor by the wireless transmitter.
Tetsuka, within the same field of endeavor, discloses a crank angle indicating system that includes a cycling device (e.g. pedaling device 1) that includes a crankset (e.g. crankshaft 12) that includes a crank angle detector (e.g. 34) that is coupled by a conductor to communicate with a computing device (e.g. 36, “ computing device 36, which may be in the form of a bicycle computer, as discussed below. In one embodiment, the crank angle detector 34 is coupled by a conductor to and communicates with an input/output module of the computing device 36”, para. [0037], [0042]-[0043]). Tetsuka discloses that the coupling between the computing device and the crank angle detector can also be wireless (e.g. “the coupling between the computing device 36 and crank angle detector 34 may be wireless.”, para. [0037]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Kuschner to include a wireless transmitter that is in communication with the crankset angle sensor with the controller in wireless communication with the crankset angle sensor by the wireless transmitter, as taught by Tetsuka, in order to provide a coupling between the controller and shaft encoder that reduces the number of wires required.
In reference to at least claim 87
Kuschner teaches a device according to claim 19. Kuschner further discloses wherein the controller comprises a wireless receiver, wherein the cycling device further comprises a wireless transmitter that is in communication with the crankset angle sensor, wherein the controller is in wireless communication with the crankset angle sensor by the wireless transmitter (e.g. “Controller 130 is a system control unit and communicates with the stimulators 101, etc. via wireless communications link 120. Controller 130 also communicates with sensors 110, etc. via wireless communications link 121.”, para. [0022], [0031], therefore the controller includes some form of wireless receiver) and further discloses the controller being in communication with a shaft encoder (e.g. “a shaft encoder can be connected to crank 432 of the bicycle and the measured knee angle can be correlated to the measured crank angle and the results stored in a lookup table in controller 130.”, para. [0033]).
However, Kuschner does not explicitly teach wherein the controller is in wired communication with the crankset angle sensor.
Tetsuka, within the same field of endeavor, discloses a crank angle indicating system that includes a cycling device (e.g. pedaling device 1) that includes a crankset (e.g. crankshaft 12) that includes a crank angle detector (e.g. 34) that is coupled by a conductor to communicate with a computing device (e.g. 36, “ computing device 36, which may be in the form of a bicycle computer, as discussed below. In one embodiment, the crank angle detector 34 is coupled by a conductor to and communicates with an input/output module of the computing device 36”, para. [0037], [0042]-[0043]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Kuschner to include the controller being in wired communication with the crankset angle sensor, as taught by Tetsuka, in order to provide a direct coupling between the controller and shaft encoder that reduces latency and improves reliability.
In reference to at least claim 89-90
Kuschner teaches a device according to claim 88. Kuschner further discloses the crankset angle sensor comprises at least one orientation sensor that is coupled to the crankset (e.g. “Given the knee angle at a point in time and knowing if the knee angle is increasing or decreasing, controller 130 then computes the crank angle B”, para. [0032], “a shaft encoder can be connected to crank 432 of the bicycle and the measured knee angle can be correlated to the measured crank angle”, para. [0033]).
However, Kuschner does not explicitly teach wherein the at least one orientation sensor comprises an inertial measurement unit including a plurality of orientation sensors.
Tetsuka, within the same field of endeavor, discloses a crank angle indicating system that includes a cycling device (e.g. pedaling device 1) that includes a crankset (e.g. crankshaft 12) that includes a crank angle detector (e.g. 34) that is coupled by a conductor to communicate with a computing device (e.g. 36, “ computing device 36, which may be in the form of a bicycle computer, as discussed below. In one embodiment, the crank angle detector 34 is coupled by a conductor to and communicates with an input/output module of the computing device 36”, para. [0037], [0042]-[0043]). Tetsuka discloses the crank angle detector can include accelerometers (e.g. “The crank angle detector 34 may utilize a sensor such as a magnetic sensor, optical sensor, or accelerometer to detect the rotation of crankshaft 12 and the crank angle.”, para. [0036], [0050])
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Kuschner to include the at least one orientation sensor comprises an inertial measurement unit including a plurality of orientation sensors, as taught by Tetsuka, in order to detect the rotation of the crankshaft.
Claim(s) 95 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2007/0208392 to Kuschner et al. (Kuschner) in view of US 2004/0023759 to Duncan et al. (Duncan) as applied to claim 35 further in view of US 2016/0023081 to Popa-Simil et al. (Popa).
In reference to at least claim 95
Kuschner modified by Duncan renders obvious a system according to claim 35. However, Kuschner modified by Duncan does not explicitly teach wherein the display is a virtual reality device or an augmented reality device.
Popa, within a similar field of endeavor, discloses a system with a cycling device (e.g. 5A) that includes a display device (e.g. 1014 and/or 1017) that is a virtual reality device or an augmented reality device (e.g. “He downloads it and runs it on his exercise bike 1015 equipped with virtual reality simulation capability. The bike has a stereoscopic display 1017 or goggles stereo TV 1018 with sound surround capabilities that may run the recorded path as a function of the local effort.”, para. [0651]-[0653]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system of Kuschner modified by Duncan to include the display being a virtual reality device or an augmented reality device, as taught by Popa, in order to provide an enhanced riding experience (‘081, para. [0654]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2010/0331603 to Szecsi which discloses providing functional magnetic stimulation to paralyzed muscles.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER L GHAND whose telephone number is (571)270-5844. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30AM - 3:30PM 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, JENNIFER MCDONALD can be reached at (571)270-3061. 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.
/JENNIFER L GHAND/Examiner, Art Unit 3796
Prosecution Insights